Skip to main content


See other formats















The Science~bf Cancer Therapy 
By G. Edward Griffin 

Dedicated to the millions of cancer victims and 
their loved ones whose suffering has been the tragic 
cost of scientific arrogance and political vested in- 
terest. May the story presented in this book help to 
arouse an indignant public awareness which, alone, 
can break the hold of these deadly forces. . . 


The material in this volume could not haVe 
been assembled without the help and guidance of 
many others. First of all, I am indebted to Dr. John 
Richardson for his persistent hammering away on 
the significance of vitamin therapy untiL it finally 
began to penetrate into this thick skull. And to my 
wife who, for months prior, had attempted unsuc- 
cessfully to arouse my curiosity on the subject. I 
will always be indebted to Dr. Ernst T. Krebs, Jr., 
for his unbelievable patience and thoroughness in 
explaining and re-explaining so many scientific 
matters. I am grateful to Bruce Buchbinder, Ralph 
Bowman, Bob Bradford, Malvina Cassese, Frank 
Cortese, Jim Foley,. Grace Hamilton, Mac and 
Well Hays, Dr. J. Milton Hoffman, Pokie Kors- 
gaard, Sanford Kraemer, Maurice LeCover, Bob 
Lee, Betty Lee Morales, Beverly Newkirk, John 
Pursely, Julie Richardson, Bob Riddel, Lorraine 
Rosenthal, Frank Salaman, 41iee Tucker, Lloyd 
Wallace, Kifno Welch, Ann Yalian, and others too 
numerous to mention for their strong 
encouragement, endless patience, and tangible 


At the time of this writing, the FDA has ban- 
ned the use of Laetrile in the treatment of cancer. 
Anyone who manufactures it, transports it across 
statei lines, sells it, administers it, or even recom- 
mends it for such use is subject to legal harass- 
ment, penalties, or imprisonment. Therefore, even 
though this entire volume is in defense of Laetrile, it 
must be clearly understood at the outset that I am a 
researcher, not a physician; I am not qualified to 
practice medicine in any way; and I am not recom- 
mending Laetrile in the treatment of cancer. If the 
reader is favorably impressed by the facts and opin- 
ions presented in the following pages, and if he 
decides to se v ek out Laetrile for his own use, he must 
do so entirely on his own evaluation of those facts 
and opinions, and not as a result of any "recom- 
mendation" on my part. " 

It was, during the summer of 1971 that I first 
remember hearing the word Laetrile. Dr. John 
Richardson and I were. sharing a short vacation in 
Oregon attempting to enjoy the natural beauties of 
that state. I say attempting because the good doctor, 
who is an extremely intense person, had brought his 
briefcase with him. It was not loaded with fishing 
gear. In fact, it yielded an almost endless supply of 
correspondence, research papers, and books all on 
the unlikely subject of VL- mandQlonitrile-beta- 
glucuroniside in the Treatment of Human Cancer. * ' 

At first I had about as much interest in this 
topic as in learning about internal stresses in the 
construction of girder bridges. Undoubtedly, these 

- / 

are fascinating subjects to the physician and the 
engineer whose professions are wrapped around 
the minutiae of related theory ^nd formula. But to 
me, the- lush green forest and the babbling stream 
were objects infinitely more worthy of my atten- 
tion, and I'm sure that my impatience had begun to 
show. But my determined companion continued 
With all the persistence of a bulldog with a fresh hold 
on a seat of pants. And he irisistecfthat I read the 
first draft of a manuscript he had prepared with the* 
possibility of submitting it for magazine publica- 

In the course of reading that manuscript, I 
became aware for the first time that, although there 
was overwhelming evidence that vitamin therapy is 
effective in the treatment of cancer, apparently 
there were powerful forces at work to prevent this 
fact from being known. Reacting as most people do 
when they first hear this assertion, I remember 
asking skeptically, "Who are they, John? Why 
would anyone want to hold back a cure for 

With the asking of that question, my interest 
finally had been aroused and, even though I 
wouldn't have believed it at the time, I was already 
embarked upon^course of inquiry that was to lead 
to the uncovering of one of the most amazing stories 
of the Twentieth Century. 

The ambitious purpose of this book is to pre- 
sent at le&st the highlights of that story and to ans- 
wer the question "Who are they , John?" 

G. Edward Griffin 
September 10, 1974 




Chapter I 17 


Examples of FDA dishonesty and cor- , 
ruption; a close look at the primary scii- \ 
entific study which declared Laetrile 
(vitamin B 17) "of no value;" the proof 
that such study was fraudulent; the 
FDA's ruling against the use of Laetrile 
because it had not been tested; and its 
refusal then to allow anyone to test it. 

Chapter II 47 


A review of entrenched scientific error 
in history; a statement of the basic vita- 
min deficiency concept of cancer as ad- 
vanced in 1952 by Dr. Ernst T. Krebs, 
Jr. ; and a survey of the supportive evi- 
dence both in nature and in recent his- 
tory to reinforce this concept. 

Chapter III 61 


A look at the many cultures around the 
world that are, or have been, free from 
cancer, and also an analysis of their na- 
tive foods I 

Chapter IV 79 


An explanation of the trophoblastic 
thesis of Gancer; a description of a sim- 
ple urine test for cancer; an appraisal of , 
BCG vaccine as an anti-cancer agent; 
and a review of the vital role played by 
the pancreas in the control of cancer. 

Chapter V 97 


The nutritional factor as a back-up 
mechanism to the enzyme factor; a bio- 
graphical sketch of Dr. Ernst T. Krebs, 
Jr. and his development of Laetrile; the. 
beneficial secondary effects of vitamin - 
B 1 7 on a wide range of human disorders ; 
and an appraisal of the complexity of the 
total natural anti-cancer mechanism. 

Chapter VI 113 


A newspaper account of a couple who 
reportedly were poisoned by eating 
/ apricot kernels; a close look at the rekl 
facts in this case; an- evaluation of the 
toxic potential of seeds containing B17 ; 
a common sense rule for eating same; 
and the clinical evidence that Laetrile is 
less toxic than sugar. 

Chapter. VII 129 


The names, professional standings] 
medical achievements, and clinical find- 
ings of some of the mor§ prominent doc- 
tors who endorse Laetrile; the beneficial 
side-effects produced by its use; a sug- 
gested anti-cancer diet; and a brief de- 
scription of vitamin B15. 

Chapter VIII 145 


Clinical evidence in support of the 
trophoblastic thesis'; laboratory experi- 
ments showing thatLaetrile. kills cancer 
cells; and case histories of a variety of 
terminal cancer patients who attribute 
H their recovery to the effect of Laetrile. 

Chapter IX 169 


The effects of surgery and radiation on 
prolonging the lifd of the cancer patient; 
a comparison showing that those who 
receive no treatment at all live just as 
long, if not longer, than those who are 

ChapterX- . 195 



Orthodox anti-cancer drugs shown to be 
ineffective and cancer-causing; FDA- 
approved experiments on humans re- 
sulting in death from drugs rather than 
from cancer. 

Chapter XI ' 223 

The inherent weaknesses of all cancer 
statistics; the need for statistical com- 
parisons in spite of these weaknesses; 
the methods of computing statistical 
values for both orthodox and nutritional 
therapies; and a reflection on the conse- 
quences of consensus medicine. 



Chapter XII * 241 


A short review of the science of cancer 
therapy ; a thesis summary of the politics 
of cancer therapy; the early history of 
the I. G. Farben chemical and phar- 
maceutical cartel; a look at the cartel's 
early success in the United States with 
particular emphasis on its "marriage" 
with DuPont, Standard Oil, and Ford. 

Chapter kill ' 269 


Early examples of cartel endorsement of 
. totalitarian regimes; particular focus on 
I. G . Farben' s role in lifting Hitler out of 
political oblivion and converting the 
Nazi state into an instrument of hidden 
cartel power. 

Chapter XIV 285 


Germany's industrial preparations for 
World War II ; the continued support by 
American industrialists given to Farben_ 
and to the Nazi regime during this 
period ; and the profitable role played by 
Ford and ITT in war production for 
both Nazi Germany and the United 
States. • 

Chapter XV 299 


Efforts to camouflage Farben owner- 
ship of firms in America; the repeated 
assistance rendered by various Rock- 
efeller interests; the successful penetra- 
tion into the U . S . government by cartel 
agents; and the final disposition of the 
Farben case. 

Chapter XVI ' 327 


A biographical sketch of John D. Rock- 
efeller, Sr., including his lifelong 
crusade against competition; the growth 
of Standard Oil; the entry of the Rock- 
efellerS/ into the investment banking 
field; the Rockefeller influence in the 
cartelized American pharmaceutical in- 
dustry; and an overview of the impor- 
tance of the Rockefeller family in inter- 
- national politics. 

Chapter XVII 347 


A preview of the drug cartel's influence 
over the curricula taught within the 
nation's medical schools; the drug- 
oriented training given to all medical 
students; the philanthropic foundation 
as a special creation of cartelists to 
—avoid payment of taxes; and the use of - 
the foundation to- obtain control over 
educational institutions. 

Chapter XVIII , 369 


The low state of medical education, in 
the U.S. prior to 1910; the importance 
of the Flexner Report in dramatizing the 
need for reform; the role played by the 
Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations 
in implementing the Flexner Report; 
and the use of extensive foundation 
funding as. a means of gaining control 
over American medical schools. 

Chapter XIX ,383 


AMA influence over the practice of 
medicine in America; the means by 
which the leadership of the A MA keeps * 
control away from the general member- 
ship; the extent to which the AMA is 
financed by the drug industry; and ex- 
amples of interlock between the two. 

Chapter XX 395 


Cartel agents in the federal government; 
the CFR examined as a parallel struc- 
ture for cartel control over U.S. foreign 
policy; cartel influence within the FDA ; 
, examples of FDA scientific ineptitude; 
and the growth of FDA's administrative 

Chapter XXI 421 


Specific examples of government har- 
assment of the organic nutrition and 
vitamin industry; the important role 
played by the mass communications 
media in discrediting Laetrile in the pub- 
lic mind; and a comparison of the cost of 
typical Laetrile therapy with that of or- 
thodox cancer treatments. 

Chapter XXII 437 


An analysis of the FDA's double stan- 
dard in which harmless non-drug mater- 
ials such as organic vitamins and food 
supplements ars burdened with restric- 
tions and regulations in excess of those, 
applied to many toxic and dangerous 
drugs; special consideration of FDA at- 
titudes toward aspirin, apricot kernels, 
Aprikern, bitter almonds, fluoridated 
water, and marijuana. 

Chapter XXIII 457 


The means by which doctors are intimi- 
dated against the use of Laetrile; the 
Sloan- Kettering investigation of Lae- 
trile as a case history of capitulation; 
and the courageous stand of Dr. John 
Richardson against the FDA. 

Chapter XXIV 477 


Conclusions regarding the specific mo- 
tives that have led various groups into * 
opposition to vitamin therapy; particu- 
lar perspective given to the role played 
by desire for world government; a re- 
view of the "limited** vs. "total" con- 
spiracy theories; and an appraisal of 
grass-roots backlash as a force for po- 
tential change. 

Chapter XXV ' 511 

- Areas of need for future research with 
B17; how the Laetrile controversy dif- 
fers from cancer therapy controversies 
of the past; an analogy between biologi- 
cal and political cancer; and a future 
projection of how both can be con- 
quered together. 


by Charles Gurchot, Ph.D. 

by Robert G. Houston 



The Science 
of Cancer Therapy 




Examples of FDA dishonesty^and 

corruption; a close look at the 

primary scientific study which 

declared Laetrile (vitamin Bn) 

(( of no. value;" the proof that 

such study was fraudulent; the 

FDA's ruling against the use of 

Laetrile because it had not been 

tested; and its refusal then to 

allow anyone to test it. 

This year 350,000 Americans will die from 
cancer. One out of four of us will develop cancer in 
our lifetime. That is over fifty million people in the 
United States alone. 

The purpose of the following study is to show 
that this great human tragedy can be stopped now 
entirely on the basis of existing scientific knowl- 

We will explore the theory that cancer, like 
scurvy or pellagra, is a deficiency disease aggra- 
vated by the lack of an essential food compound in 
modern man's diet, and that its ultimate control is to 
be found simply in restoring this substance to our 
daily intake. 



What you are about to read does not carry the 
approval of organized medicine. The Food and 
Drug Administration, the American Cancer Soci- 
ety, and the American Medical Association have 
labelled it fraud and quackery. In fact, the FDA 
and other agencies of government have used every 
means at their disposal to prevent this story from 
being told. They have arrested citizens for holding 
public meetings to tell others of their convictions on 
this subject. They have confiscated films and 
books. They even now are prosecuting doctors who 
apply these theories in an effort to save the lives of 
their own patients. 

The attitude of Big Brother, expressed bluntly 
in 1971 by Grant Leake, Chief of the fraud section 
of California's food and drug bureau, is this: 
"We're going to protect them even if some of them 
don't want to be protected." 1 

Early in 1974, the California medical board 
brought formal charges against Stewart M. Jones, 
M.D., for using Laetrile in the treatment of cancer 
patients. It was learned later, however, that Dr. 
Julius Levine, one of the members of that board, 
himself had been using Laetrile in the treatment of 
his own cancer. When Dr. Jones' case came up "for 
review, the political pressures were so great that 
Dr. Levine felt compelled to resign from his post 
rather than come out openly in support of Dr. Jones 
and his patients. 2 

All of this is happening in a land which boasts 

'"Debate Over Laetrile," Time, April 12, 1971. 

2 " Laetrile Tiff, State Medic Out," San Jose Mercury (Calif.), April 1 0, 


of freedom and whose symbol is the Statue of Lib- 
erty. For the first time in our history, people are 
being forced to flee from our shores as medical 
emigrants seeking freedom of choice and 
sovereignty over their own bodies. Laetrile has 
been available in Australia, Brazil, Belgium, 
Costa Rica, England, Germany, Greece, India, Is- 
rael, Italy, Japan, Lebanon, Mexico, Peru, the 
Philippines, Spain, Switzerland, the U.S.S.R., 
Venezuela, and Vietnam — but government au- 
thorities do not permit it in the land of the free. 

In spite of all this, however, an increasing 
number of doctors are beginning to defy the 
bureaucracy, and are testing and proving in their 
own clinics that the vitamin concept of cancer is 

With billions of dollars spent each year in re- 
search, with additional billions taken in from the 
cancer-related sale of drugs, and with vote-hungry 
politicians promising ever-increasing government 
programs, we find that, today, 'there are far more 
people making a living from cancer than are dying 
from it. If the riddle were to be solved by a simple 
vitamin, this-gig&ntic commercial and political in- 
dustry could be wiped out overnight. The result is 
that the science of cancer therapy is not nearly as 
complicated as the politics of cancer therapy. 

If there was one beneficial aspecJt of the 
much-publicized Watergate scandals of the Seven- 
ties, it was in the awakening of even the most trust- 
ingly naive citizen to the reality that not all govern- 
ment officials tell the truth. And when caught in 
such "mendacities," they invariably claim that 


they did so only to protect the national security, the 
public health, or to promote some other equally 
noble objective. 

This Watergate syndrome is not new. Several 
years ago, an FDA agent who had testified in court 
against a Kansas City businessman was* forced to 
admit under cross-examination that he had lied 
under oath no less than twenty-eight times. When 
the defense attorney asked him if he regretted what 
he had done, his reply was, "No. I don't have any 
regrets. I wouldn't hesitate to tella lie if it would 
help the American consumer." 1 

During this same trial it was learned that the 
FDA had used wire taps to make secret tape re- 
cordings of the defendant's phone conversations. 
Reminiscent of Watergate, when! the judge ordered 
these recordings .to be handed over, the FDA 
officer replied: "We don't have any tapes; we don't 
have them.' They've been erased!" 

The FDA is not squeamish over its tactics to 
"help the American consumer." When a 
businessman falls into disfavor with the bureauc- 
racy, then there are no hplds barred, and the law is 
used, not as a, reason for attack, but as a. weapon of 
attack. In other words, the FDA does not take 
action because the law says it should. It does so 
because it wants to, and then searches through the 
law for aiegal excuse. 

In the celebrated case of U.S. vs Dextra 
Fortified Sugar, for instance, the FDA had ruled 
that it was "misbranding" to fortify sugar with vi- 

J As quoted by Omar Garrison, The Dictocrats, (Books for Today, 
Ltd., 1970, Chicago-London-Melhrourne), p. 130. 


tamins and minerals and still call it sugar. But the 
court ruled otherwise, pointing out: 

The basic flaw in the government'scase is 
that it is seeking, under the guise of mis- 
branding charges, to prohibit the sale of a 
food in the market place simply because it 
is not m sympathy with it^use. 

The controversy surrounding Dr. Andrew 
Ivy's anti-cancer drug known as Krebiozen is 
well-known. It should be remembered, though, 
that, prior to crossing swords with the "FDA, Dr. 
Ivy had been .widely acknowledged as one of the 
nation's foremost medical specialists. As head of 
the University of Illinois clinical sciences depart- 
ment, he had prepared 350 candidates for the 
graduate degrees of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) 
andMaster of Science (M.S.). He was an American 
representative at the- Nuremberg trials after World 
War II in Germany. The American Medical As- 
sociation had awarded him bronze, silver, and gold 
medals in recognition of his outstanding work in the 
field of medicine- He had written over a thousand 
articles published in scientific and medical journals. 
In fact, the FDA itself often had called upon him as 
an expert to offer medical testimony in court. But 
when he began to use an unorthodox approach to 
cancer therapy, overnight he was branded as a 

During the course of Dr. Ivy's trial, a letter 
was read into the court record written by a doctor 
from Indianapolis. The doctor stated in his letter 


that he was treating a patient who had multiple 
tumors, arid that a biopsy of the tissue had shown 
these tumofirto be cancerous. The doctor said that 
he had obtained Krebiozen from Dr. Ivy's 
laboratories, and had administered it, but that it had 
done absolutely no good whatsoever. When called 
to the witness stand, however, the doctor's answers 
were vague and evasive. Under the pressure of 
close cross-examination, he finally broke down and 
admitted that he, never had jtreated such a patient, 
never had ordered the biopsy in question, and never 
had used Krebiozen even once. The whol6 story 
had been a lie. Why did he give false testimony? 
His reply was that one of the FDA agents had 
written the letter and asked him to sign it. He did so 
because he wanted to help the agency put an end to 
quackery. 1 

In September of 1963, the FDA released a 
report to the effect that Krebiozen was, for all prac- 
tical purposes, the same as creatine, a common 
substance that was found in every hamburger. To 
prove this point, they also released a photographic 
overlay supposedly showing the spectrograms of 
Krebiozen and creatine superimposed one over the 
other. These were dutifully published in Life 
magazine and in other prominent segments of the 
mass communications media as^ >4 unimpeachable 
proof that Krebiozen was useless. 

When Senator Paul Douglas saw the spectro- 
grams, he was suspicious. So he asked Dr. Scott 
Anderson, one of the nation's foremost authorities 

l Ibid., pp. 134, 135.. 


on spectrograms, to make his own study. Using 
completely standard techniques of spectrogram 
analysis, Dr. Anderson identified twenty-nine dif- 
ferences between spectrograms of the two sub- 
stances. Furthermore, there were sixteen chemical 
. and color differences. The version released to the 
press by the FDA had been carefully moved off 
center until there was a maximum appearance of 
similarity, but when restored to the true axis, the 
two were as different as night and day. 1 

On December 5, 1971; The Indianapolis Star 
published a lengthy letter condemning Dr. Ivy and 
his Krebiozen. It was the typical FDA line about 
quackery, and fraud, and the false hopes that al- 
legedly lead poor cancer victims to delay "really 
effective" therapy until it is too late. It was signed 
by a John T. Walden, Deputy Assistant Commis- 
sioner for Public Affairs* Krebs Laboratories, San 

Krebs Laboratories of San Francisco is owned, 
by Dr. E. T. Krebs, Jr., co-discoverer of vitamin 
B;t and pioneer in the development of Laetrile. A 
letter from his organization, not only condemning 
Dr. Ivy but praising orthodox cancer therapy 
— well, that was news! Upon investigation, how- 
ever, it was shown that: (1) Krebs Laboratories did 
not have a Commissioner of Public Affairs, (2) it 
had never heard of John T. Walden, (3) it had never 
presumed to make any tests of Krebiozen, and (4) it 
held Dr. Ivy "in the highest esteem as one of the 
great physiologists of our generatiofi." 

l lbid.. pp. 278-280. 


No one knows, of course, who sent the bogus 
letter. Butseveral questions are worth considering. 
First of all, who would want to? Second, who would 
have enough details of events and places to write 
such a letter? Third, who, would be able to repeat 
the FDA line so faithfully and completely? Fourth, 
who would be sufficiently familiar with large gov- 
ernment bureaucracies as even to invent, such a title 
as "Commissioner of Public Affairs?" And fifth, 
since the whole thing was obviously a lie, who 
would go out of his way to tell such a lie 6 ven * * in the 
public interest?" 

The tactics used against Laetrile have been 
even more dishonest than those against Krebiozen. 
Perhaps the most damaging of them has been a 
pseudo-scientific report released in 1953 by the 
Cancer Commission of the California Medical As- 
sociation. Published in the April issue of California 
Medicine, the report presented an impressive col- 
lection of charts and technical data indicating that 
exhaustive research had been carried out into every 
aspect of Laetrile. Its molecular composition had 
been analysed, its chemical action studied, its effect 
on tumor-bearing rats observed, and its effective- 
ness on human cancer patients determined. The 
stern conclusion of all this supposedly objective 
research was stated: "No satisfactory evidence has 
been produced to indicate any significant cytotoxic, 
effect of Laetrile on the cancer cell." 

The conclusions of this California Report are 
sufficient for most physicians and researchers. Not 
one in ten thousand has ever even seen Laetrile, 
much less used it. Yet, they all know that Laetrile 


does not work because the California AMA Cancer 
Commission skid so, and they have had no reason 
to question the reliability of those who did the work. 
Reporter Tom Valentine interviewed many 
leading cancer specialists to determine what they 
thought about Laetrile. Here he describes a typical 
reaction: ' 

Dr. Edwin Mirand of Roswell Memorial 
Hospital in Buffalo, N.Y., said: " We've 
looked into it and found it has no value." 
When asked if the renowned little hospi- 
tal, which deals only with cancer, actu- 
ally tested Laetrile, Dr. Mirand said, 
"No, we didn't feel it was necessary after 
others of good reputation had tested it 
and found it had no effectiveness in the 
treatment of cancer." He referred, as all 
authorities do, to the California Report. 1 . 

Othei^ have run up against the same stone 
wall. Professional researcher/ David Martin, re- 
ported this experience: 


Tfre cancer expert in question, as I had 
anticipated, told me that Laetrile was 
4 'sugar pills." Had he told me that he had 
used Laetrile experimentally on X 
number of patients and found it com- 
pletely ineffective, I might have been im- 
pressed.' But when I asked him whether 

1 "Government Is Suppressing Cancer Control,' ' The National Tat- 
tler, March 11, 1973, p. 2. 


he had ever used it himself, he said that he 
had not. When I asked him whether he 
had ever travelled abroad to study the 
experience with Laetrile therapy in Ger- 
many, Italy, Mexico, the Philippines, or 
other countries, he replied that he had 
not. And when I asked him if he had ever 
made a first-hand study of the pros and 
cons of the subject, again he conceded 
that he had not. He was simply repeating 
what he had heard from others who, in 
turn, were probably repeating what they 
had heard from others, going all the way 
back to the antiquated 1953 report of the 
California Cancer Commission. 1 

It ts important, therefore, to know something 
of the nature of the California Report and of the 
scientific integrity of those who drafted it. „ 

Although the report as published in California 
Medicine was unsigned, it ^yas written by two men: 
Dr. Ian MacDonald, Chairman, and Dr. Henry 
Garland, Secretary, Dr. MacDonald was a promi- 
nent cancer surgeon, and Dr. Garland was an inter- 
nationally famous radiologist. Both are listed in 
Who's Who. ' ^. ■ 

. There wer£"seven other prominent-physieians 
on the commission— including four more surgeons, 
another radiologist, and a pathologist — but they 
played no major part in the preparation of the re- 
port. None of these men— not even MacDonald or 

1 Cancer News Journal, January/April, 1 97 1, p. 22. 


Garland — had ever used Laetrile in first-hand ex- 
periments of their own. All they had^ione was to 
make evaluations and summaries of the written 
records of others. 

Before exaflfiining those evaluations and sum- 
maries, let us first recall that Mac Donald and Gar- 
land were the two physicians who had made na- 
tional headlines claiming that there was no connec- 
tion between cigarette smoking and lung cancer. In 
an address before the Public Health Section of 'the 
Commonwealth Club of San Francisco on July 9, 
1964, Dr. Garland had said: 

A current widely held hypothesis is that 
cigarette smoking is causally related to a 
vast number of different diseases ,'ranging 
from cancer to coronary arteriosclerosis. 
* After studying the question for several 
years, notably in its reported relationship 
, to primary bronchial cancer, it is my con- 
sidered opinion that the hypothesis is not 
proven .... 

Cigarettes in moderation are regarded by 
many as one of the better tranquilizers 
.... It is likely that obesity is a greater 
hazard to American health than ^ 

Dr. Mac Donald was even more emphatic. In a 
feature article in U.S. News & World Report, he is 
shown, smiling, with a cigarette in his hand; and is 
quoted as saying that smoking is "a harmless pas- 


time up to twenty-four cigarettes per day." And 
then he added: 

One could modify an old slogan: A pack a 
day keeps lung cancer away. 1 

It is a curious fact that it was precisely at this 
time that cigarette manufacturers- were fighting to 
recover their loss of sales-that resulted from grow- 
ing public concern over lung cancer. In fact, the 
tobacco industry had already pledged the first ten 
million dollars out of a total of eighteen million to 
the AM A for "research" into the question of smok- 
ing and health, 

The effect of this veritable flood of money from 
a source with, shall we say, "a vested interest" in 
the outcome of the research, was incredible and did 
not speak well for the AMA. The result was the 
conversion of a relatively simple, straight-forward 
project into a monstrous boondoggle of confusion 
and waste. *-■ 

In the report of the AMA's Committee for 
Research on Tobacco and Health, it says: 

To date, approximately $14 million has 
been awarded [from the tobacco 
industry] to 203. individual research pro- 
jects at 90 universities and institutions. 
As a direct result of these grants, 450 

'"Here's Another View: Tobacco May be Harmless," U.S. News & 
World Report, Aug. 2, 1957, pp. 85, 86. . 


reports have been published in scientific 
journals and periodicals. 1 

The report then listed the research projects and 
described their purposes. Here are just a few: 

Nicotine Receptors in Identified Cells of 
the Snail Brain. 

The Effects of Nicotine on Rehavior of 

Angina Pectoris and Bronchitis in Rela- 
tion to Smoking -A Study in American 
and Swedish Twin Roosters. 

Post-Maturity Syndrome in the Pregnant 
Rat After Nicotine Absorption During 

Interactions of Nicotine, Caffeine and 
Aleohol in Squirrel Monkeys. 

The Effect of Smoking in Placental Ox- 
ygen Transfer in Gravid Ewes. 

Urinary Excretion, Tissue Distribution 
and Destruction of Nicotine in Monkey 
" and Dog. 

x Third Research Conference, Committee for Research on Tobacco 
and Health, AM A Education and Research Foundation* May 7-9, 
1972, p. 4. 


Body Build and Mortality in 105, 00& 
World War II Army Veteran^. 

Upon going through the back reports of the AMA's 
Committee for Research on Tobacco and Health, 
one is able to count but five research projects that 
are primarily concerned with cancer. One of those 
dealt with laboratory testing procedures only, and 
another was an experiment to see if tobacco smoke 
could be used to cure cancer of the skin! So only 
. three of these projects really dealt with the area of 
major public concern. Three out of two hundred 
and three is only about one-and-a-half pefqent — 
which tells us something about the AMA's 
scientific integrity on the subject of smoking and 

With the expenditure of a mere eighteen mil- 
lion dollars — which is small, indeed, compared to 
the tobacco industry's advertising budget ovpr the 
same period— it was possible to direct the AMA's 
medical research away from the important question 
of cancer and into a hundred giddy questions that 
served only to confuse and delay the ultimate truth. 

Dazzled by the meteor shower of thousand 
dollar bills, the^AMA, in its December 1959 issue of 
the American Medical Association Journal, 
dutifully published ail editorial stating flatly that 
there was insufficient evidence "to warrant the as- 
sumption" that cigarette smoking was the principal 
factor in the increase oflung cancer. Furthermore, 
through its gargantuan research program, the AM A 
was making it increasingly difficult to obtain that 


Was there any connection between the 
eighteen million dollars given to tfye AMA from the 
tobacco industry and the public pronouncements of 
MacDonald and Garland, two of its most promi- 
nent members in California? Perhaps not, although 
it has been rumored that these gentlemen of science 
actually did receive $50,000 for their 
"testimonials." 1 

Whether or not\this is true, of course, is not 
important 410 w. What is important is the fact that 
their medical opinion, if it had been widely fol- 
lowed, clearly would have resulted in the suffering 
and death of untold additional millions/Also impor- 
tant is the fact that these are the same "experts" 
whose medical opinion is being widely quoted and 
followed today iti the question of Laetrile. 

An interesting footnote to this subject is the 
fact that Dr. MacDonald was burned to death in 
bed a few years later in a fire started by his own 
cigarette. Dr. Garland, who had boasted of chain- 
smoking since early childhood and who had claimed 
to be living proof that cigarettes were harmless, a 
few years later died of lung cancer. 

In 1963, ten years after the publication of the 
original California Report, the California State De- 
partment of Health officially decreed that the 
findings of the antiquated study were "true," and 
adopted them as its own. When it did so, however, 
it performed an unexpected favor for the public, 
because it published for the first time all the original 

'See The Immoral Banning of Vitamin Bn, by Stewart M. Jones, 
M.S., M.D., Ph.D., Palo Alto, Calif., Jan., 1974, p. 1 . Also Cancer 
News Journal, Jan./April, 1971, p. 3. 


experiments and studies upon which the report had 
been based and, in doing so, it made available the 
documentary eyidenoe proving that MacDonald 
and Garland had falsified their summary of those 

In the 1953 report, the authors published the 
conclusions of John W. Mehl, M.D., to the effect 
that cyanide could not bereleased from Laetrile. As 
will be explained in a later chapter, the release of 
cyanide at the cancer cell is part of the reason that 
Laetrile works. Implying that cyanide cannot be 
I>£oduced v therefore, was a severe blow to the cred- 
ibility of Laetrile theory. Dr. Mehl was quoted as 
saying: "These results are inconclusive, and will be 
extended, but they do not support the claims made 
for Laetrile." 

With the publication of the original experi- 
ments ten years later, however, quite a different 
story emerged. Buried in a maze of statistics, ta- 
bles, and charts, can be found an item labeled 
"Laetrile Report Appendix 4." It is a laboratory 
report signed by G. Schroetenboer and W. Wol- states: 

After refluxing for three hours, the odor 
of hydrogen cyanide could be 
detected .... The hydrogen cyanide 
was distilled into sodium hydroxide and' 
determined by the Prussian Blue 
technique. 1 

^Report by Cancer Advisory Council on Treatment of Cancer with 
Beta-Cyanogenic Glucosides ("Laetriles"), California Department or 
Public Health, 1963, Appendix 4, pp. 1,2. 


This report was dated January 14, 1953 — two 
months before Dr. Mehl claimed that cyanide could 
not be released from Laetrile. It is significant, 
therefore, that MacDonald and Garland com- 
pletely ignored the positive report while giving 
prominence to the negative one. 

Since that time, of course, the release of 
cyanide front Laetrile has been confirmed by the 
AMA's chemical lab, by the cytochemistry section 
of the National Cancer Institute, and even by the 
California Department of Public Health. This is the 
same California Department of Public Health that 
then officially pronounced the original report to be 
' -true" and adopted it as its own. 

Another claim made by Drs. MacDonald and 
Garland was that microscopic examinations of 
tumors from patients who had been treated with 
Laetrile showed absolutely no indication of favora- 
ble chemical effect. Ten years later, however, this 
assertion was shown to be a bald-faced lie. Appen- 
dix Three contains the findings of two pathologists 
who stated in plain English that they did observe 
anti-tumor effects which, indeed, could have been 
caused by the Laetrile. In a statement dated De- 
cember 15, 1952, for instance, John W. Budd, 
M.D., reported: 

Case 1 M . . . . Hemorrhagic necrosis of 
tumor is extensive .... An interpreta- 
tion of chemotherapeutic effect might be 

Al^o an autopsy report by J.L. Zundell, 


dated September 10, 1952, discusses two clear 
cases of observed anti-tumor effect. It states: 

M-l .-;.. . This might represent a chemi- 
cal effect since the cells affected show 
coagulation necrosis and pyknosis .... 

M-3 .... There appears to be more de- 
generation in the tumor cells in the lymph 
node. I would consider this as a possible 
result of chemical agent .... 

Two cases . . . showed moderate*, 
changes . . . which might be considered 
as chemotherapeutic toxic cellular 
changes. 1 

What could be more plain than that? Neverthe- 
less y Mac Donald and Garland stated flatly in the 
California Report: "No evidence of cytotoxic 
changes was observed by any of the consultants/' 2 

That statement, of course, was a lie of gigantic 

Even if the findings of these independent re- 
searchers had not been falsely summarized by 
Mae Donald and Garland, the 1953 California Re- 
port still would, have been totally useless as a 
scientific verdict against Laetrile because the 
strength of the doses used on cancer patients was 
much too weak to prove anything. In fact, it was 

x Ibid.,. Appendix 3, pp. I, 2. 
2 Op. c/7., p. 324. 


about one-fiftieth of what generally is used now to 
obtain optimum results. 

In the earlier days of Laetrile research, clini- 
cians were cautiously administering only fifty to 
one-hundred milligrams at a time. Gaining 
confidence with experience, these levels gradually 
were raised until, by 1974, Laetrile was being used 
intravenously at levels of six to nine thousand mil- 
ligrams daily. Generally, it takes an accumulation 
of fifty to seventy thousand milligrams over a 
period of about a week or ten days before the pa- 
tient can report tangible indications of improve- 
ment. But in the experiments used for the California 
Report, the typical dose given was only about fifty 
milligrams per injection. The maximum single dose 
was less than two hundred milligrams, and the max- 
imum accumulative dose was only two thousand 
milligrams spread over twelve injections. Five pa- 
tients received only two iry'ections, and Eve re- 
ceived only one. 

It is not surprising, therefore, that the Califor- 
nia experiments failed to produce conclusive evi- 
dence that Laetrile was effective against cancer. As 
Dr. Krebs observed at the time,. "There is nothing 
quite so easy to accomplish as failure." 

In spite of all the incredible distortions of fact 
and the perversions -of scientific truth, Drs. Mac- 
DonalcTaod Garland were forced to admit on page 
three of their California Report: 

All of the physicians whose patients were 
reviewed spoke of increase in the sense of 
well-being and appetite, gain in weight, 
and decrease in pain .... - — 


Then, attempting to belittle the&e important results, 
they added: 

... as though these observations consti- 
tuted evidence of definite therapeutic ef- 
fect. ^ 

That statement, alone, should have 
disqualified the California Report, for these obser- 
vations are, indeed, among the very things which 
indicate to a physician whether or not his drug 
therapy is effective. 1 Most doctors would be ecstat- 
ically happy if they could cause their cancer pa- 
tients to experience, an increase in a sense of well- 
being and appetitefa gain in weight, and especially a 
decrease in pain. 

The California Report has remained for over 
two decades as the primary authority cited by 
cancer "experts" ad nauseum and as the basis of 
legal restraints against Laetrile, Yet, it was the 
product of bias, not objectivity. It was calculated to 
deceive, not to clarify. It was fiat, not science. 

In addition to the California Report, there have 
been several other less publicized studies of Lae- 
' trile supposedly by qualified and reputable prgani- 
, zations. These include a 1953 project at Stanford 
University, a series of tests in 1960 at the National 
Cancer Institute, a 1961 study at the University of 
California at Berkeley, one in 1962 at the Diablo 
Labs at Berkeley, and a 1065 study on behalf of the 
Canadian Medical Association at McGttWniversi- 
ty in Montreal. Incredible as it may seem v every 

'Lang, Current Diagnosis and Treatment, 1972, p. 902. 


one of these has been tarnished by exactly the 
same kin^l of scientific ineptitude, bias, andxmtright 
deception as found in the 1953 California Report, 
Some of these studies openly admitted evidence of 
anti-cancer effect but hastened to attribute this ef- 
fect to other causes. Some were toxicity studies 
only, which means that they weren't even trying to 
see if Laetrile was effective, but merely to deter- 
mine how much of it was required to kill the patient. 
In every case, these studies dealt either with tumors 
transplanted into mice or with tumors in vitro, 
which means in a laboratory incubation dish not 
connected to living tissue in any way. Human be- 
ings with genuine spontaneous tumors were never 

It is obvious that transplanted tumors do not 
necessarily respond the same as spontaneous 
ttimors, and that the metabolism of rodents is -not 
necessarily the same as that of man, and certainly 
that tissue in a dish is not the same as that connected 
to and nourished by a living organism. 

In most of these experiments, the only criteri- 
on used to measure the success of Laetrile was 
reduction in tumor size. This may sound reasonable 
at first, but one must realize that most tumors are a 
mixture of malignant and benign cells, and that the 
transplanted tumors used on laboratory mice con- 
tain only about three or four percent outright cancer 
tissue. The more malignant tissues generally are 
rejected by the healthy mouse and cannot be suc- 
cessfully transplanted. It can be seen, therefore, 
that even if Laetrile eliminated one hundred percent 
of the cancer, these tumors would be reduced only 


three or four percent at the most. Life extension, 
not tumor size, is the only meaningful test of 
therapeutic success. 

In the 1963 update of the California Report, the 
Cancer Advisory Council attempted to defend its 
previous use of inadequate doses of Laetrile by 
claiming that subsequent experiments were based 
upon up to 170 times the, original levels, and still 
there was no "evidence 'of tumor control/ ' These 
experiments, however, were performed on mice, 
not people. Transplanted tumors were used, not 
spontaneous ones; tumor reduction in size was the 
criterion of success, not life extension. And there is 
no record of how many injections were given or 
over what period of time — which means that, con- 
ceivably, only one injection was administered. And 
to make matters even worse, it is quite likely that, in 
some of the more recent experiments, a substance 
was used that wasn't even Laetrile. 

Dr. Dean Burk, head of the Cytochemistry 
section of the National Cancer Institute, confirmed 
this when he said: 

I have been given to understand by Dr. 
Jonathan Hartwell of the Drug De- 
velopment Branch of NCI that the amyg- 
dalin [Laetrile] material employed was of 
questionable origin and chjemical 
authenticity. 1 

Dr. Bayard Morrison, assistant director of the Na- 

l "High Polpics Blamed for Refusal to Test Anti-Cancer Agent/' by 
Don C. Matchan, Alameda Times-Star, July 14, 1970, p., 2. 


tional Cancer Institute, is unconvinced that Lae- 
trile has value. Nevertheless, he agrees with Dr. 
Burk, and has said: 

We can't say that Laetrile is no good 
without further proof. 1 

In 1973, after many months of extensive Lae- 
trile studies on mice, the Southern Research Insti- 
tute in Birmington, Alabama released an extensive 
report of it's findings to the National Cancer Insti- 
tute in Washington. The NCI, in turn, announced 
to the world that these studies once again proved 
that Laetrile had no significant effect in the treat- 
ment of cancer. Upon further investigation, how- 
ever, all was not as it appeared to be. Digging into 
the raw data contained in the reports, tables, and 
charts, Dr. Burk discovered that there were three 
general groups of mice identified in the experiment: 
(1) A large group that received too little Laetrile, (2) 
another large group that received too much, and (3) 
a very small group that received an optimum 
Those that received too little died just as quickly as 
those in the control group which received none at 
all. Those that received too much died sooner than 
those in the control group. But those that received 
the proper dosage survived significantly longer than 
those that received none at all! 

In view of these amazing and highly significant 
results, one may wonder at how the National 
Cancer Institute could have said that Laetrile was 

1 "Laetrile's Value as Cancer Cure StillUnsubstantiated," Biomedical 
News, July, 1971. 


of no value. Here is how they did it. They lumped 
all three groups into the same statistics — including 
those which received too little and those that re- 
ceived too much. When these large groups were 
added to the small group that survived significantly 
longer, they brought down the average of the total 
to the point where they honestly could say that 
these mice, as a total group, did not survive sig- 
nificantly longer than those which had received no 
Laetrile at all. The statistics didn't lie. But liars had 
used statistics. | 

This, then, is the background on the so-called 
scientific evidence that Laetrile is a fraud. Based 
upon this perversion of truth, laws have been 
passed making it illegal to prescribe; administer, 
sell, or distribute Laetrile, or to "make any rep- 
resentation that said agents have any value in ar- 
resting, alleviating, or curing cancer." 2 

Y§t, leading medical authorities — even among 
those who are not convinced that Laetrile works, 
admit openly that they cannot honestly say "that 
Laetrile is no good without further proof." 

And they are not going to seek that proof, 
either. In fact, every time the proponents of Lae- 
trile attempt to obtain permission to conduct official 
tests in U.S. hospitals, they are turned down cold. 
On April 6, 1970, for example, the McNaughton 
Foundation,, under the sponsorship of Mr. Andrew 
McNaughton, submitted an application to the FDA 

1 Dr. Dean Burk presented a devastating expose of this manipulation of 
statistics in a fourteen page open letter to Dr. Seymour Perry of the 
NCI dated March 22, 1974. 

2 This wording is taken from Section 1 0400. 1 ,' Title i 7, of the California 
Administrative Code. 


for permission to engage in what is called IND 
(Investigation of New Drug) Phase One studies. 
Permission was granted on April 27. Then, in the 
words of one reporter, "All hell broke loose." 1 The 
FDA apparently received a phone call from an irate 
and politically influential figure who passed the 
word: "Stop the tests!" 

The next day, April 28,4he FDA sent another 
letter tQ the McNaughton Foundation advising 
that, upon reviewing the records, certain 
"deficiences" had been found in the IND applica- 
tion, and demanding extensive additional data 
yvithin ten days. Curiously, the letter was not deliv- 
ered to the McNaughton Foundation until May 6, 
nine days after it supposedly had been written, and 
it is suspected that the letter may actually have been 
written much later but back-dated so as to make it 
impossible to cortiply with the already ridiculous 
ten day deadline. On May 12, six days after receipt 
of the "deficiency letter," McNaughton received a 
telegram from the. FDA advising him that the ap- 
proval for Investigation of New Drug had been 

Nevertheless, hoping that the FDA would 
reinstate its IND approval upon receipt of the addi- 
tional data, McNaughton proceeded with the 
paperwork and, on May 15, just nine days after 
receipt of the FDA's initial order, sent off to 
Washington everything that had been requested. 
By now, however, the FDA was firm. Laetrile 
would not be tested. 

•Don C. Matchan, "Why Won't They Test Laetrile?", Prevention, 
Jan., 1971, pp. 149-150. 


A former high official of the FDA told Dr. 
Dean Burk of the National Cancer Institute that he 
could not recall in over thirty years of service any 
instance in which just ten short days were de- 
manded for a fifty pagereply to alleged deficiencies . 
And, on October 1, 1970, there was nothing in the 
FDA procedural manual requiring termination 
notices after only ten, days for compliance. 1 

Clearly, the entire action was contrived in re- 
sponse to political pressures as an excuse to stop 
the testing of Laetrile. 

One of the reasons given for revoking approval 
for IND was that Laetrile might be toxic. The FDA 
said solemnly: 

Althbugh it is often stated in the IND that^ 
amygd^lin is non-toxic, data to demon- 
strate this lack of toxicity are 
absent ... .It is considered to be 
dangerous to base the starting dose for a 
chronic (6 + weeks) study in man- on a 
single dose study in mice. It is also 
darigerouslo initiate human studies while 
the nature of the toxicity has not been 
elucidated in large animal species. 2 

This is an incredibld statement. First of all, as 
will be illustrated in a later chapter, the non- toxicity 
of amygdalin (Laetrile) has been a well-known, 

better from Dr. Dean Bufk to Elliot Richardson, Secretary of HEW, 
dated Oct. 19, 1971. 

2 The Ad Hoc Committee of Oncology Consultants For Review and 
Evaluation of Amygdalin (Laetrile), FDA, Aug. 12, 1961, pp. 3,4. 


fully accepted and non-controversitfl fact for a 
hundred years. Second, the human case histories 
submitted as part of the IND application were 
further proof of Laetrile's safety. And third, the 
very question of toxicity is absurd inasmuch as all 
of the drugs approved by the FDA and currently 
used in orthodox cancer therapy are extremely 
toxic. To deny the testing of Laetrile on the grounds 
that it might be toxic is the height of sophistry. 

Another reason given by the FDA for refusing 
to permit the testing of Laetrile was that the doctors 
who had treated their patients with it had not kept 
sufficiently detailed clinical records;. This, too, is an 
incredible excuse in view of the fact that Phase One 
studies do not require any clinical records at all! 

In righteous indignation, the courageous Dr. 
Burk of the National Cancer Institute, wrote to 
Elliot Richardson, then Secretary of HEW (which 
administered the FDA), and said: 

As you should^well know, the granting of 
FDA permission for Phase One studies 
of IND has no absolute or invariable re- . 
quirements for any clinical studies. at all, . 
although the sponsor is requested to sup- 
ply any type of indication that he may 
possess, which the McNaughton Found- 
ation has complied with to the limit of 
current feasibility. Dr. Contreras [of 
Mexico] and Dr. Nieper [of Germany] 
have been primarily preoccupied, quite 
justifiably, with treating cancer patients 
with Laetrile and related adjunctive -\ 


therapies, and not with carrying out a 
clinical evaluation of Laetrile in the pre- 
^ cise and complete schedule of FDA pro- 
tocols. For you to indicate that their rec- 
ords are inadequate for such a purpose is 
clearly a red herring, since there is no 
such IND Phase One requirement in- 
volved, nor corresponding claim madeA 

But the "fix" was on, and it was on at the top. 
Laetrile would/iof be tested, regardless of the facts. 
On September 1, J971, the FDA announced that 
the Ad Hoc Committee of Consultants for Review 
and Evaluation of Laetrile had found "no accepta- 
ble evidence of therapeutic effect to justify clinical 
trials/ 5 And then it announced that, because of 
their findings, Laetrile could no longer be pro- 
moted, sold, or even tested in the United States. 2 

Why would anyone, in or out of government, 
deliberately falsify the clinical results of past Lae- 
trile experiments and then make it impossible for 
anyone else to do tests of theirown? We shall have 
more to say about that in Part Two of this study 
when we examine the politics of cancer therapy. 
Part of the answer, however, was provided by the 
unsinkable Dr. Burk in a letter to the Honorable 
Robert A. Roe, dated July 3, 1973. He said: 

You may wonder, Congressman Roe, 
why anyone should go to such pains and 
mendacity to avoid conceding what hap- 

x Op. cit., Oct. 19, 1971. 

2 Press release, HEW/FDA, Sept. 1, 1971, 


pened in the NCI-directed experiment. 
Such an admission and concession is cru- 
cially central. Once any of the FDA- 
NCI-AMA-ACS hierarchy so much as 
concedes that Laetrile anti-tumor 
efficacy was indeed eveh onqe observed 
in NCI experimentation, a permanent 
crack in bureaucratic armor has taken 
place that can widen indefinitely by 
further appropriate experimentation. For 
this reason, I rather doubt that tliat 
experimentation . . . will be continued 
or initiated. On the contrary, efforts 
probably will be made, as they already 
have, to "explain away", the already ob- 
served positive efficacy by vague and 
unscientific modalities intended to mis- - 
lead, along early Watergate lines of cor- 
ruption, including eventually futile 
arrogance .... 

There are now several thousand persons 
in the United States taking Laetrile daily. 
M.D.s by the hundreds are- studying or 
'" e^e-n taking it themselves, and certain 
hospitals are now undertaking its study. 
FDA or no FDA, NCI or no NCI, ob- 
fuscations or no obfuscations. The day 
may not bp far off when face-saving on 
the part of the NCI-FDA spokesmen of 
the type just indicated will have lagged 
beyond possibility, as is already now the 
case for some Watergate casualties of 
Courts and Hearings, as a result of per- 


sons placing personal integrity secondary 
to other considerations. 1 

Now, that takes guts. For a man who is em- 
ployed by the federal government, especially as 
head of the Cytochemistry -section of the National 
Cancer Institute, to charge openly that his 
superiors are corrupt — well, such a man is, unfor- 
tunately, a rare specimen in Washington today. 
Concluding his testimony on Laetrile before a Con- 
gressional committee in 1972, Dr. Burk explained: 

I don't think of myself as, a maverick. I 
am just telling you what I honestly think, 
and when I think something is true, I am 
quite willing to say so and let the chips fall 
where they may .... 

And now, I will get back to my laboratory 
where truth is distilled. 2 

Let us, figuratively speaking, follow Dr. Burk- 
to his laboratory. Let us put aside, for the moment, 
the question of politics and corruption, and turn 
now to the- distillation of scientific truth. 

better reprinted in Cancer Control Journal, Sept./Oct., 1973, pp. 8, 9. 

2 From Hearings, Subcommittee on Public Health and Environment of 
the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Rep- 
resentatives, Ninety-Second Congress. 



A review of entrenched scientific 

error in history; a statement of 

the basic vitarhin deficiency 

concept of cancer as advanced in 

' x 1952 by Dr. Ernst T. Krebs, Jr.; 

and a survey of the supportive 

evidence both in nature and in 

recent history to reinforce 

this concept. 

The history of science is the history of struggle 
against entrenched error. Many of the world's 
greatest discoveries initially were rejected by the 
scientific community. And those who pioneered 
those discoveries often were ridiculed and con- 
demned as quacks or charlatans. 

Columbus was bitterly attacked for believing 
the Earth was round. Bruno was burned at the stake 
for claiming the earth was not the center of the 
Universe. Galileo was imprisoned for teaching that 
the Earth moved around the Sun. .Even the Wright 
Brothers were ridiculed and condemned for claim- 
ing that a machine could fly above the earth. 

In the field of medicine, in the year 130 A.D.; 
the physician Galen announced certain anatomic 
theories that later proved to be correct, but at the 



time he was bitterly opposed and actually forced to 
flee from Rome to escape the frenzy of the mob. In 
the Sixteenth Century, the physician Andreas Ves- 
alius was denounced as an imposter and heretic 
because^ of his discoveries in the field of human 
anatomy. His theories were accepted after his 
death but, at the time, his career was ruined, and he 
was forced to flee from Italy. William Harvey was 
disgraced as a physician for b&ieving that blood 
was pumped by the heart and actually moved 
around the body through arteries. William Roent- 
gen, the discoverer of X-rays, at first was called a 
quack and then condemned out of fear that l^is 
"ray" would invade the privacy of the bedroom. 
y William Jenner, when he first developed a vaccine 
against smallpox, also was called a quack and was 
strongly criticized as a physician for his supposedly 
cruel and inhuman experiments on children. And 
Ignaz Semmelweis was fired from his Vienna hospi- 
*" tal post for requiring his maternity staff to wash 
their hands.. 

Centuries ago it was not unusual for entire 
. naval expeditions to±>e wiped out by scurvy/ Be- 
tween 1600 and 1800 the casualty list of the British 
Navy alone was over one million sailors. Medical 
experts of the time were baffled as they searched in 
vain for some kind of strange bacterium, virus, or 
toxin that supposedly lurked in the dark holds of 
ships. And yet, for hundreds of years, the cure was 
already known and written in the record. , 

In the winter of 1535, when the French ex- 
plorer Jacques Cartier found his ships frozen in the 
ice off the St. Lawrehce River, scurvy began to take 


its deadly toll. Out of a crew of one hundred and 
ten, twenty-five already had died, and most of the 
others were so ill they weren't expected to recover. 

And then a friendly Indian showed them the 
simple remedy. Tree bark and needles from the 
white pine — both rich in ascorbic acid, or vitamin 
C — were stirred into a drink which produced im- 
mediate improvement and swift -recovery. 

Upon returning to Europe, Cartier reported 
this incident to the medical authorities. But they 
were amused by such "witch-doctor cures of ignor- 
ant savages" and did nothing to follow it up. 1 

Yes, the cure for scurvy was knovtfn. But, be- 
cause of scientific arrogance, it took over two 
- hundred years and cost hundreds of thousands of 
lives before the medical experts began to accept and" 
apply this knowledge. , 

Finally, in 1847, John Lind, a young surgeon's 
mate in the British Navy discovered that oranges 
and lemons produced relief from scurvy, and rec- 
ommended that the Royal Navy include citrus 
fruits in the stores of all its ships. And yet, it still 
took forty-eight more years before his recommen- 
dation was put into effect. When it was, of course, 
the British were able to surpass all other sea-faring 
nations, and the "Limeys" (so-called because they 
carried limes aboard ship) soon became the rulers of 
the Seven Seas. It is no exaggeration to say that-the 
greatness of the British Empire in large measure 
waslhe direct result of overcoming scientific prep 
udice against vitamin therapy. 

^ee Virgil J. VogcVs American Indian Medicine (University of Ok- 
lahoma Press, 1970). 


The Twentieth Century has proven to be no 
exception to\this pattern. Only a generation ago 
large portions of the American Southeast were 
decimated by the dread disease of pellagra. The 
well-known physician Sir William Osier, in his 
Principles and Practice of Medicine, explained that 
in-ohe institution for /the insane in Leonard, North 
Carolina, one-third of the inmates died of this dis- 
ease during the winter months. This proved, he 
said, that pellagra was contagious and caused prob- 
ably by an as yet undiscovered virus. As far back as 
1914, however, Dr. Joseph Gojdberger had proven 
that this condition was related to diet, and later 
showed that it could be prevented simply by eating 
liver or yeast. But it wasn't until the 1940's — almost 
thirty years later — that the "modern" medical 
world fully accepted pellagra as a vitamin B 
deficiency. 1 

The story behind pernicious anemia is almost 
exactly the same. The reason why all these diseases 
were so' reluctantly accepted as vitamin deficienr 
cies is because men tend to look for positive cause- 
and-effect relationships in which something clearly 
causes something else. They find it more difficult to 
comprehend the negative relatipnship in which 
nothing or the lack of something can cause an effect. 
But perhaps of even more importance is the reality of 
intellectual pride. A man who has spent his life 
acquiring scientific knowledge far beyond the grasp 
of his fellow human beings is not usually inclined to 

! See History and Geography of the Most Important Diseases, by 
Edwin H. Ackerknechf, (Hafner Publishing Co., Inc., N.Y. 1972) pp. 


listen with patience to someone who lacks that 
knowledge — especially if that person suggests that 
the solution to the scientist's most puzzling medical 
problem is to be found in a simple back-woods or 
near-primitive concoction of herbs and foods. The 
scientist is trained to search for complex answers 
and tends to look with smug amusement upon solu- 
tions that are not dependent upon his hard-earned 
skills. . — . 

To bring this a little closer to home , the average 
M.D. today has spent over ten years of intensive 
training to learn about health and disease. This 
educational process continues for as long as he 
practices his art. The greatest challenge to the med- 
ical profession today is cancer. If the solution to the 
cancer puzzle were to be found in the simple foods 
we eat (or don't eat), then what other diseases might 
also be traced to this cause? The implications are 
explosive. As one doctor put it so aptly, "Most of 
my medical training has been wasted. I've learned 
the wrong things!" And nobody wants to discover 
that they have learned — or taught — the wrong 
things. Hence, there is an unconscious but quite 
natural tendency among many scientists and physi- 
cians to reject the vitamin deficiency concept of all 
such diseases until it is proven, and proven, and 
proven again. 

By 1952, Dr. Ernst T. Krebs, Jr., a biochemist 
in San Francisco, had advanced the theory that 
cancer, like scurvy and pellagra,- is not caused by 
some kind of mysterious bacterium, virus, or toxin, 
but is merely a deficiency disease aggravated by the 
lack of an essential food compound in modern 


man's diet. He identified this compound as part of 
the nitriloside family which occurs abundantly in 
nature in over twelve hundred edible plants and 
found virtually in every part of the world. It is 
particularly prevalent in Jhe seeds of those fruits in 
the Prunus Rosacea family (bitter almond, apricpt, 
blackthorn, cherry, nectarine, peach, and plum), 
but also contained in grasses, maize, sorghum, mil- 
let, cassava, linseed, apple seeds, and many other 
foods that, generally, have been deleted from 
the menus of modern civilization. 

It is difficult to establish a clear-cut classifica- 
tion for a nitriloside. Since it does not occur entirely 
by itself but rather is found in foods, it probably 
should not be classified as Like sugar, it is a 
food component or a food factor. Nor can it be 
classified as a drug, inasmuch as it is a natural, 
no n- toxic, water-soluble substance entirely normal 
to and compatible with human metabolism. The 
. proper name for a food factor that contains these 
properties is a vitamin. Since this vitamin normally 
is found in the B-complex, and since it was the 
seventeenth such substance to be isolated within 
this complex, Dr. Krebs identified it as vitamin Bn. 

Emphasizing the point that this substance is 
not a drug, Dr. Krebs said: 

A chronic disease is one which usually does 
not pass away of its own^cccofd. A metabolic dis- 
ease is x>ne which occurs within the body and is not 
transmittable to another person. Cancer, therefore, 
is defined as a chronic metabolic disease. 

There are many of these diseases that plague 
modern man, such as muscular dystrophy, heart 


disease, multiple sclerosis, and sickle-cell anemia. 
Modern science has spent many millions of dollars 
searching for a prevention to these cripplers and 
killers, but they are little closer to the answers 
today than they were when they first started. 
Perhaps the reason is that they are still looking for 
-that something which causes these diseases instead 
of the lack of something. 

Dr. Krebs has pointed out that, in the entire 
history of medical science, there has not been one 
chronic metabolic disease that was ever cured or 
prevented by drugs, surgery, or mechanical ma- 
nipulation of the body. In every case — whether it be 
scurvy, pellagra, rickets, beri-beri, night blindness, 
pernicious anemia, or any of the others — the ulti- 
mate solution was found only in factors relating to 
adequate nutrition. And he thinks that this is an 
important clue/as to where to concentrate our scien- 
tific curiosity in the search for a better understand- 
ing of today's diseases, particularly cancer. 

Burthere are other clues as well. Before look- 
ing at the more technical aspects of Dr. Krebs' 
theory, it is well that we examine some of them. For 
example, as almost everyone who owns a dog or cat 
has observed, these domesticated pets often seek 
out certain grasses to eat even though they are 
adequately filled by other foods. This is particularly 
likely to happen if the animals are not well. It is 
interesting to note that the grasses selected by in- 
stinct are Johnson grass, Tunis grass, Sudan grass, 
and others that are especially rich in nitrilosides or 
vitamin B 17. 

Monkeys and other primates at the zoo when 


given a fresh peach or apricot will carefully pull 
away the sweet fleshy part, crack open the hardpit, 
and devour the small seed that remains. Instinct 
compels them to do this even though they hav s e 
never seen that kind of fruit before. These seeds are 
one of the most concentrated sources of nitrilosides 
to-be found anywhere in nature. 

Wild bears are great consumers of nitrilosides 
in their natural diet. Not only do they seek out 
berries that are rich in this substance, but when they 
kill small grazing "animals for their own food, in- 
stinctively they pass over the muscle portions and 
consume first the viscera and rumen which are filled 
with nitriloside grasses. 1 

x Iacaptivity, animals seldom are allowed to eat 
all the foods of their instinctive choice. In the San 
Diego Zoo, for example > the routine diet for bears, 
although adequate in volume and nutritious in many, 
other respects, is^ almost totally devoid of ni- 
trilosides. In 'bne grotto alone, over a six-year 
period^ five bears died of cancer. \t was generally 
speculated by the experts that a virus had been the 

It is highly significant that one never finds 
cancer in the carcasses of wild animals killed in the 
hunt. These creatures contract the disease only 
when they are domesticated by man and forced to 
e&t the foods he provides or the scraps from his 

It is amazing how cancer researchers can come 

face-to-face with this evidence and still fail to 


l SeeBearsin The Family, by Peter fcrott, Ph.D. (E.P. Dutton&Co., 
Inc., N.Y.,. 1962). 


realize its significance. For instance, Dr. Dennis P. 
Burkitt, the man who first identified the form of 
cancer known as Burkitt Lymphoma, recently de- 
livered a lecture at the College of Medicine at the 
University of Iowa. After two decades of experi- 
ence and research in Uganda and similar parts of 
the world, Dr. Burkitt observed that non-infectious 
(chronic metabolic) diseases such as cancer of the 
colon, diverticular disease, ulcerative colitis, 
polyps, and appendicitis, all seem to be related in 
some way. "They all go together," he said, "and 
I'm going to go so far as to suggest that they all have 
a common cause." He went on to say that all of 
these diseases are unknown in primitive societies 
and "always have, their maximum incidence in the 
more economically developed nations." 

Then Dr. Burkitt turned his attention to cancer 
specifically and observed: 

This>s a disease caused by the way we 
live. This form of cancer is almost un- 
known in the animal kingdom. The only 
animals who get cancer or polyps of the 
large bowel are those that live closest to 
our way of life — our domestic dogs eating 
our leftovers. 1 

These, of course, are all excellent observa- 
tions. Uut apparently neither-Dr. Burkitt nor any- 
one in his esteemed audience could find any mean-^ 
ipg in these facts. The lecture closed with the con- 
clusion that colon cancer probably is related to 

14 The Evidence Leavens; We Invite Colon Cancer," Medical World 
News, Aug. 11, 1972, pp. 33, 34. 


bacteria in the large bowel and that we should all eat 
more bran and other cereal fibers to increase the 
roughage content of our intestines and the size of 
our stools! 

But at least Dr. Burkitt is looking at the foods 
we eat, which is a huge step forward. He may be 
heading in the wrong direction, but at least he is on 
the right track. If more cancer researchers would 
begin to think in terms of foods and vitamins rather 
than bacteria and viruses it wouldn't take them long 
to see why the cancer rate in America is steadily 

Measured in terms of taste, volume, and vari- 
ety, Americans eat very well, indeed. But expen- 
sive or tasty food is not necessarily good food. Most 
Americans assume that it makes little difference 
what they put into their stomachs as long as they are 
full. Magically, everything that goes in somehow 
will be converted into perfect health. They scoff at 
the thought of proper diet. Yet, many of these same 
people are fastidious about what they feed their 
pedigreed dogs and cats or their registered cattle 
and horses. v 

Dr. George M. Briggs, professor of nutrition at 
the University of California, and member of T:he 
Research Advisory Committee of the National 
Livestock and Meat Board, has said: "The typical 
American diet is a national disaster. ... If I fed it 
to pigs or cows, without adding vitamins and other 
supplements, I could wipe out the livestock 
industry." 1 

'"University of California Nutrition Professor, A Health Advisor to 
the U.S. Government . . . Charges the Typical American Diet is a 
National Disaster/' National Enquirer, Dec. 5. 1971, p. 2. 


A brief look at the American diet tells the 
story. Grocery shelves are now lined with high- 
carbohydrate foods that have been processed re- 
fined, synthesized, artificially flavored, and-loaded 
with chemical preservatives. 1 Some manufactur- 
ers, aiming their advertisements at the diet- 
conscious consumer, even boast of how little real 
food there is in their product. 

Everyone knows that modern processing re- 
moves many of the original vitamins from our 
foods, but we are told not to worry about it because 
they have been put back before sending to market. 
And so we see the word "enriched" printed cheer- 
fully across our bread, milk, and other foods. But 
make no mistake about it, these are not the same as 
the original. As the June 1971 Journal of the Ameri- 
can Geriatric Society reported: 


Vitamins removed from food and re- 
turned as "enrichment" are not a safe 
substitute, as witnessed by the study in 
which Roger J. Williams, Ph.D., re- 
ported that rats fed enriched bread died or 
were severely stunted c}ue to malnutri- 
tion. Rats fed a more whole bread 
flourished, for the most part, by compari- 
son. . 

'According to the March 1972 issue of Scientific American (p. 20) there 
are approximately 2500 additives currently used in U.S. food products 
for flavoring, coloring, preservation, and similar purposes. The safety 
factor of most of these chemicals has not been determined, except to 
the negative. Nevertheless, they are still being used with FDA ap- 


Much illness, we are learning, may be due 
to vitamin- mineral deficiencies; Even 
senility has been proven to be caused by a 
deficiency of Vitamins B and C. 

Indeed, here is a worthy experiment that can and 
should be carried out in every grade-school science 
class. Rodents fed only "enriched" bread very 
soon become anti-social. Some even become can- 
nibalistic, apparently responding to an instinctive 
drive to obtain the vital food elements they are 
lacking. Most will die within a month or two. Once 
children have witnessed this, they seldom retain the 
same appetite for white bread that they may have 
had prior to the experiment. 

"Enriched" bread is just one small part of the 
larger picture. Millet once was the world's staple 
grain. It is high in nitriloside content. But now it has 
been replaced by wheat which has practically none 
at all — even the whole wheat. Sorghum cane has 
been replaced by sugar cane with the same result. 
Even our cattle are fed increasingly on quick- 
growing, low nitriloside grasses so there is less vita- 
min B}7 residue in the meat we eat. In some places, 
livestock now are being fed a diet containing fifteen 
percent paper to fatteji them quicker for market. 1 
In retrospect, there were many customs of our 
grandparents that, although lacking in scientific 
Irationale at the time, were based upon centuries of 
accumulated experience through trial and error, 
and have since been proven to be infinitely wise. 
4 'An apple a day keeps the doctor away* ' could well 

1 "Paper Fattens Cattle/' (UPI) Oakland Tribune, Nov. 22, 1971. 


have been more than an idle.slogan, especially in an 
era when ft was customary for everyone to eat the 
seeds of those apples as well. It is a fact that the 
whole fruit — including the seeds — of an apple con- 
tains an amazingly high concentration of vitamins, 
minerals, fats, and protons that are essential for 
health. Apple^ seeds are especially rich in ni- 
trilosides or vitamin Bit. The distasteful "spring - 
tonic" or soxghum molasses and sulphur also was a 
rich source of nitriloside. Arid grandma's apricot 
and peach preserves almost always contained the 
kernels of these canned fruits for winter eating. She 
probably didn't know what they contained or why 
they were good for you. But she knew that they 
were good for you simply because her mother hlad 
told her so. v 

And so we see that, -in the past fifty years, the 
foods that once provided the American people with 
ample amounts of natural vitamin B17 gradually 
have been pushed aside or replaced altogether by 
foods almost devoid of this factor. Significantly, it 
is during this same time span that the cancer rate 
has moved steadily upward to the point where, 
today, one out of every four persons in the United 
States is destined to contract this disease. 

It cannot be "argued that the cancer rate is up 
merely because other causes of death are down and 
people are living lpnger. First of all, they are not 
living that much longer — only a year or two more, 
on the average, over the past fifty years. In fact, in 
1972, a year in which the average age* of the Ahneri- 
can population was headed downward, a year in 
which the population growth rate had shrunk prac- 


tically to zero, the death rate from cancer rose to its 
highest level in history: three times the annual aver- 
age since 1950. 1 Secondly, in those countries 
where, statistically, people live longer than in the 
United States, the cancer rate for them is lower than 
for us. 

So there is no escape from the significance of 
these facts. While the medical world, the federal 
government, and the American Cancer Society are 
spending billions of dollars and millions of man- 
hours searching for an exotic cancer virus against 
which they plan to spend an equal altiount to create 
ah effective man-made immunization, the answer 
lies right under thefr noses. In fact, it has existed in 
the written and spoken record for thousands of 

And God said: Behold I have given you 
every herb bearing seed upon the earth, 
and all trees that have in themselves seed ( 
of their own kind, to be your meat. 
(Genesis 1:29) 

,4 'Cancer Cure Still Eludes Scientists," (NEA) News Chronicle 
(Calif.) Aug. 29, 1973, p. A-9. 





A look at the many cultures around 

the world that are, or have been, 

free from cancer; and also an 

analysis of their native foods. 

The best way to prove or disprove the vitamin 
theory of cancer would be> to take a great many 
people numbering in the thousands , and, over a 
period of many years, expose them to a consistent 
diet of rich nitriloside foods, and then check the 
results. This, surely, would be the ultimate test. 

Fortunately, i,t already has been done. 

In the remote recesses of the Himalaya Moun- 
tains, between West Pakistan, India, and China, 
there is a tiny kingdom called Hunza. These people 
are known world overibr their amazing longevity 
and good health. It is not uncommon for Hunzakuts 
to live beyond a hundred years, and some even to a 
hundred and twenty, or more. Visiting medical 
team^ from the outside world report that there 
never has been a case of cancer in Hunza. 

Although presently accepted science is unable to 
explainH'/zy these people should be free of cancer, it 
is interesting to note that the average Hunza diet 
contains over two hundred times more nitriloside 



than the average American diet. In fact, in that land 
where there is no such thing as money, a man's 
wealth is measured by the number of apricot trees 
he owns. And the most prized of all foods is con- 
sidered to be the apricot s§ed> 

One of the first medical teams to gain acpessLto 
the remote kingdom of Huhza was headed by the 
world-reknown British surgeon and physician Dr. 
Robert M cCarrisori. Writing in the January 7, 1922, v 
issue Of the Journal of The American M&dical As- 
sociation, Dr. McCarrison reported: 

The Hunza has no known incidence of 
cancer. They have . . . an abundant crop' 
of apricots . These they dry in the sun and 
use very largely in their food. » 

Visitors to Hunza, 'When offered a fresh apricot 
or peach/ to eat, usually drop the hard pit to the 
ground when they are through, invariably, this 
brings looks H of dismay and disbelief to the faces of 
their guides, for, to them, the seed inside is the 
delicacy of the fruit. 

Dr. Allen E. Banik, an optometrist from Kear- 
ney, Nebraska, was one such visitor. In his book, 
Hunza Land, he describes what happened: 

My first experience with Hunza apricots, 
fresh from the tree, came when my guide 
picked several, washed them in a moun- 
tain stream, and handed them to me. I ate 
the luspious fruit and casually tossed the 
seeds to the ground . After an incredulous 


glance at me, one of the older men 
stooped and picked up the seeds. He 
cracked them between two stones, and 
handed them to me. The guide said with a 
smile: "Eat them. It is the best part of the 

My curiosity aroused, I asked, "What do 
you do with the seeds you do not eat?" 

The guide informed me that many are 
,* stored but most of them are ground very 
fine and then squeezed under pressure to 
produce a very rich oil. "This oil," my 
guide claimed, * looks much like olive oil . , 
Sometimes we swallow a spoonful of it 
when we need it. On special days, we 
deep-fry our chappatis [bread] in it. On 
festival nights, our women use the oil to 
shine their hair. It makes d good rubbing 
compound for body bruises. 1 

In 1973, Prince Mohammed Ameen Khan, son 
of the Mir of Hunza, told Charles Hillinger of the 
Los Angeles Times that the average life expectancy 
of his people is about eighty-five years. He added: 
"Many members of the Council of Elders who help 
my father govern the state have been over one 
hundred." 2 

With a scientific distrust for both hearsay and 

1 Hunza Land, (Whitehorn Publishing Co., Long Beach, Ca.) pp. 123; 
2 Los Angeled Times, May 7, 1973, Part 1-A. 


the printed; word, Dr. Ernst T. Krebs, Jr. iriet 
- Prince Khan for dinnfer where he queried him on the 
accuracy of the LA . Times report. The prince hap- 
pily confirmed it and then described how it was not 
uncommon to eat thirty to fifty apricot seeds as an 
after-lunch snack. All of this is in addition to a diet 
of fresh and dried apricots.. These often account for 
an excess of 75,000 International Units of vitamin 
A per day as well as for over 150 mg. of vitamin Bi?. 
Despite all of this, or possibly because of it, the life 
expectancy in Hunza, the Prince affirmed, is about 
eighty-five years. This is in puzzling contrast to the 
United States where male life expectancy is 66.6 

It will be noted that the Hunzakut intake of 
vitamin A may run severi-and-a-half times the max- 
imum amount the FDA allows to be used in a tablet 
or capsule while this agency has tried to outlaw 
entif ely the eating of apricot seeds. 

The women of Hunza are renowned for their 
strikingly smooth skin even into advanced age. 
Generally, their faces appear fifteen to twenty 
years younger than their counterparts in other areas 
of the world. Thejr claim that their beauty secret is 
merely the apricot oil which they apply to their 
. skirls almost daily. 

In 1974 Senator Charles Percy, a mefnber of 
the Senate Special Committee on Agijig, visited 
Hunza. When he returned to the United States he 

We began curiously to observe the life 
style of the Hunzakuts. Could their eat- 
ing habits be a source of longevity? . . . 


- Some Hunzakuts believe their long lives . 
are due in part to the apricot. Eaten fresh 
in the summer, dried in the sun for the. 
long winter^ the apricot is a. staple in 
Hunza, much as rice is in other parts of 
the world. Apricot seeds are ground fine 
and squeezed for their rich oil, used for 
both frying and lighting. * 

And so, the Hunzakuts use the apricot, its 
se£d, and the oil from its seed for practically every- 
thing. They share with most western scientists an 
ignorance of the chemistry and physiology of the 
nitriloside content ^f this fruit, but they have 
learned empirically that their life is enhanced by its 
generous use. 

Five or six excellent volumes similar to Dr. 
B^nik's have been written by those who have risked 
their lives over the treacherous Himalaya Mountain 
passes to -gain entrance to Hunza. Also, there liave 
been scores of magazine and newspaper articles 
published over the years. They all present the iden- 
tical picture of the average Hunza diet. In addition 
to the ever-present apricot, the Hunzakuts eat 
mainly grain and fresh vegetables. These include 
buckwheat/- millet, alfalfa, peas, broad beans, 
turnips, lettuce, sprouting pulse or gram, and ber- 
r ries of various sorts. All of these, with the y excep- 
tion of lettuce and turnips, contain nitriloside or 
vitamin B17. 

In 1927 Dr. McCarrison was appointed Direc- 
tor of Nutrition Research in India. Part of his work 
consisted of experiments on albino rats to see, what 

lt4 You Live To Be 100 in Hunza," Parade, Feb. 17, 1974, p. ll! 


effect the Hunza diet had on them compared to the 
diets of other countries. Over a thousand rats were 
involved in the experiment and carefully observed 
from birth to twenty-seven months, which corre- 
sponds to about fifty years of age in man. At this 
point the Huiiza-fed rats were Mlled and autopsied. 
Here is what McCarrison reported: * / 

During the past two jand a quarter years 
there has been no case of illness in the . 
"universe' * of albino rate, no death from 
natural causes in the adult stock, and, but 
for a few accidental deaths, no ijrfantile 
mortality. IJoth clinically ind at post- 
mortem, examination of this stock has - 
been shown to be remarkably free from 
disease. It may be that some of themhave 
cryptic disease of one kind or another, 
but if so, I have failed to find either clini- 
< cal or microscopic evidence of it. 1 

By comparison, over two thousand rats fed on 
typical Indian and Pakistani diets soon developed 
eye ailments, ulcers, boils, bad teeth, crooked 
spines, loss of hair, anemia, skin disorders, heart, 
kidney and glandular weaknesses, and a wide vari- 
ety of gastrointestinal disorders. 

. In follow-up experiments, McCarrison gave a 
group of rats the diet of the lower classes pf Eng- 
land. It consisted 6f,white bread, margaVine, 
sweetened tea, boiled vegetables, canned meat, and 

J See Hunza Health Secrets by Renee Taylor (Award Books, N.Y., 
1964), pp. 96, 97. 


inexpensive jams and jellies — a diet not top far re- 
moved from that of many Americans. Not only did 
the rats develop all kinds of chronic metabolic dis^ 
eases, but they also became nervous wrecks. 
McCarrison wrote: 

They were nervous and apt to bite their 
attendants; they lived unhappily to- 
gether, and by the sixteenth day of the 
experiment they began to kill and eat the 
weaker ones amongst them. 1 - 

It is not surprising, therefore, to learn that 
westernized man is victimized by the chronic 
metabolic disease of cancer while his counterpart in 
Hunza is not. And le$t anyone suspect that this 
difference is due to hereditary factors, it is impor- 
tant to know that when the Hj^nzakuts leave their 
secluded land and adopt the menus of other coun- 
tries, they soon succumb to the same diseases and 
infirmities — including cancer*— as the rest of man- 

The Eskimos are another people that have 
been observed by medical teams for many decades 
and found to be totally free of cancer. In Vilhjalmur 
Stefanson's book, Cancer: Disease of Civilization? 
An Anthropological and Historical Study, 2 it is re- 
vealed that the traditional Eskimo diet is amazingly 
rich in nitrilosides that come from the residue of the 
meat of caribou and other grazing animals, and also 
from the salmon berry which grows abundailtly in 

l lbid. p. 97. 

2 HiU and Wang, N.Y., 1960. 


the Arctic areas. Another Eskimo delicacy is a 
green salad*made out of the stomach contents of 
caribou and reindeer which are full of fresh tundra 
grasses. Among these grasses, Arrow grass (Trig- 
lochin Maritima) is very common. Studies made by 
the U.S. Department of Agriculture have shown 
that Arrow grass is probably rifcher in nitriloside 
content than any other grass. 

What happens when the Eskimo abandons his 
traditional way of life and begins to relypn western- 
ized foods? He becomes even more cancer-prone 
than the average American; 

Dr. Otto .Schaefer, M.D., who has extensively 

> studied the diets and health patterns of the Es- 
kimos, reports that these people have undergone an 

, extremely rapid change in their eating habits. This 
has been caused indirectly as a result of the con- 
struction of a string of military and civilian airports 
built across the Canadian Arctic in the mid-50' s. 
These attracted the Eskimos to new* jobs, new 
homes, new schools — and sew menus. Just a little 
over one generation ago, their diet consisted almost 
entirely of game and fish, along with seasonal ber- 
ries., roots, leafy greens aa<J seaweed. Carbohy- 
drates Were almost completely lacking. 

Now afl of this has changed-. Dr. Sclraefer re- 

When the Eskimo gives Up his nomadic 
life and moves into the settlement^ he and 
his family undergo remarkable changes. 
His children grow faster and taller, and 
reach puberty sooner. Their teeth rot, his 


wife comes down with gallbladder dis- 
ease and, likely as not, a member of his 
family will suffer one of the degenerative 
diseases for which, the white man is well 
known. 1 

There are many other peoples in the world that 
could be cited with the same characteristics. The 
Abkhasians deep in the Caucasus Mountains on the 
Northeast side of the Black Sea are a people with 
almost exactly the same record of health and 
longevity as the Hunzakuts. The parallels between 
the two are striking. First, Abkhasia is a hard land 
which does not yield up a harvest easily. The in- 
habitants ar? accustomed to daily hard work 
throughout their lives. Consequently, their bodies 
and minds are strong right up until deaith, which 
comes swiftly with little or no preliminary illness. 
Like the Hunzakuts, the Abkhasians expect to live 
well beyond eighty years of age. Many are over a 
hundred. The oldest person in the world is Mrs. 
Shirali'Mislimov of Abkhasia who* in 1972, was 
estimated to be 165 years old. 2 

The other common factor, of course, is the 
food, Which, typically, is low in carbohydrates, 
high in vegetable proteins, and rich in minerals and 
vitamins, especially vitamin B17. 

The Indians of North America, while they re- 

1 Nutrition Today, Nov./Dec, 1971, as quoted in " Modern Refined 
Foods Finally Reach The Eskimos," Kaysers Health Research, May, 
1972, pp. 11,46,48. 

2 "The Secret.of Long Life" by Sula Benet, (N.Y. Times News Serv- 
ice), LA. Herald Examiner, Jan. 2, 1972, p. A-12, also "Soviet Study 
Finds Recipe for Long Life," National Enquirer, Aug. 27, 1972, p. 13. 


mained true to their native customs and foods, also 
were remarkably free from cancer, At one time the 
American Medical Association urged the federal 
government to conduct a study in an effort to dis-, 
cover why there was so little cancer among the 
Hopi and Navajo Indians. The February 5, 1949, 
issue of the Journal of the AMA declared: 

The Indian' s diet seems to be low in qual- 
ity and quantity and wanting in variety, 
and the doctors wondered if this had any- 
thing to do with the fact that only 3 6 cases 
of malignant cancer were found out of 
30,000 admissions to the GSnado 
Arizona Mission Hospital. In the same 
population of white persons; the doctors 
- said there would have been about 1 ,800. 

Thirty-six cases compared to eighteen hundred 
represents only two percent of the expected 
number. Obviously, something is responsible. 

Dr. Krehs-, who has done exhaustive research 
on this subject, 'has written: 

I have analyzed from historical -and an- 
thropological records the nitrilosidic con- 
tent of the diets of these various North 
American tribes. The evidence should 
put tfr rest forever the notion of toxicity in 
nitrilosidic foods. Some of these tribes 
would ingest over 8,000 milligrams of vi- 
tamin B 17 (nitriloside) a day. My data on 


the Modoc Indians are particularly 
complete. 1 

A quick glance at the cancer-tree native popu- 
lations in tropical areas, such as South Ajnerica and 
Africa, re Veals a great abundance and variety of 
nitriloside-rich foods. In fact, over one-third of all 
plants native to these areas, contain vitamia Bi 7. 
One of the most common is cassava, sometimes 
described as '"the bread of the tropic." But this is 
not the same as the sweet cassava preferred in the 
cities of western civilization. The native fruit is 
more bitter, but it is rich in nitriloside. The sweet 
cassava has much less of this yital substance, and 
even that is so processed as to eliminate practically 
all nitrile ions.? 

As far back as 1913, Dr. Albert Schw£itz$r, 
the world-famous medical missionary to Africa, 
had put his finger on the basic cause of cancer. He 
had not isolated the specific substance, but he was 
convinced from his observations that a difference in 
food was the key. In his preface to Alexander Berg- 
las' Cancer: Cause and Cure (Pasteur Institute, 
Paris, 1957), he wrote: 

On my arrival in Gabon in 1913, I was 
astonished to encounter no cases of 
cancer. I saw none among the natives two 
hundred miles from the coast. ... I can 

1 Letter from Dr. E.T. Krebs, Jr. to Dr. Dean Burk of tnVNational 
Cancer Institute, dated March 14, 1972. : - 

2 The Laetriles, op. cit., pp. 9, 10. 


not, of course, say positively that there 
was no cancer at all, but, like other fron- 
tier doctors, I can. only say that, if any 
cases existed, they must have been quite 
rare. This absence of cancer seemed to be 
due to the difference in nutrition of the 
natives compared to the Europeans. . . . 


The missionary and medical journals have re- 
corded many such cancer-free populations all over 
* * the world. Some are in tropSc regions, some in the 
Arctic. Some are hunters who eat great quantities 
of meat, some are vegetarians who eat almost no 
meat at all. From all continents and all races, the 
one thing they have in common is that the degree to 
which they are free from caiicer is in direct propor- 
tion to the amount of nitriloside or vitamin B17 
found in their natural diet. 

In answer to this, the skeptic may argue that 
these primitive groups are not exposed to the same 
cancer-producing elements thkt modern man is, and 
perhaps that is why they are immune. Let them 
breathe the same smog-filled air, smoke the same 
cigarettes, swallow the same chemicals added to 
tHeir food or drinking water, use the same soaps or 
deodorants, and then see how they fare. 

This, of course, is a valid argument. But, for- 
tunately, even that question now has been resolved 
by experience. 

In the highly populated and often air-polluted 
State of California, for example, there .are over 
100,000 people comprising a population that sh<^ws 


a cancer incidence of less than fifty per cent of that 
for the remaining population. This unique group has 
the same sex, age, socio-economic, educational, 
occupational, ethnic and cultural profile as the re- 
mainder pf the State's population that suffer? twice 
as high an incidence of cancer. This is the Seventh 
Day Adventist population of the State. 

There is only one detectable material differ- 
ence that sets this population apart from that of the 
rest of the State. This population is predominantly 
vegetarian. By increasing greatly the quantity of 
vegetables in their diet to compensate for the ab- 
sence of meat they increase proportionately their 
dietary intake of vitamin B17 (riimloside). Probably 
the reason why this population is not totally free 
from cancer— as are the Huiizakuts, the aboriginal 
eskimos, and other such populations — is that (1) 
many members of this sect have joined it after al- 
most a lifetime on a general 1 or standard dietary 
pattern; (2) the fruits and vegetables ingested are 
not consciously chosen for vit&min B u content nor 
are fruit seeds generally eaten by them; and (3) not 
all Seventh Day Adventists adhere to the veg- 
etarian diet. 

Another group that, because of religious doc- 
trine, eats very little meat and, thus, a greater quan- 
tity of grains, vegetables, and fruits which contain 
Biz, is the Mormon population. In Utah, which is 
. seventy- three percent Mormon, the cancer rate is 
twenty-five percent below the national average. In 
Utah county, which includes the city of Provo and 
is ninety percent Mormon, the cancer rate is below 


th$ national average by twenty-eight percent for 
women and thirty-five percent for men. 1 

In the summer of: 1940 the Netherlands became 
occupied by the military forces of Nazi Germany. 
Und^r a dictatorial regime &£ entire nation of about 
nine million people gradually was compelled to 
change its eating habits drastically. Dr. C. Moer- 
man, a physiciairin Ylaardlngen, the Netherlands, 
described what happened: f 

White bread was replaced by whole-meal 
bread and rye bread. The supply of sugar 
was drastically cut down and soon en- 
tirely stopped. Honey was used, if avail- 
able. The oil supply from abroad was 
.- stopped arid, as a result, no margarine - 
was produced any more, causing the peo- 
ple to try and get butter. Add to this that 
the consumer received as much fruit and 
as many vegetable s as possible -, hoarding 
and buying from the farmers what they 
could, In short; people satisfied their 
hunger with large quantities of natural 
elements rich in vitamins, 

Now think of what happened later: in 
1945 this forced nutrition suddenly came 
to an end. What was the result? People 
started eating again white bread, mar- 
garine, skimmed milk, much sugar»-much 
meat, and only few vegetables and little 

141 Cancer Rate for Mormons Among Lowest," Los Angeles. Times] 
Aug. 22, 1974, Part II, p. L h r 


fruit. ... In short: people ate too much 
unnatural and too little natural food, and 
therefore got too few vitamins, 1 

Dr. Moerman then proceeded to sho vy that the 
statistical "cancer rate" published by the Nether- 
lands Department of Welfare and Health dropped 
almost straight down from a peak in 1942 to its 
lowest point in 1945. But after 1945, with the re- 
sumption of processed foods, the cancer rate began, 
to climb again and has shown a steady rise ever 
since. , 

Of course the experience in the Netherlands or 
among the Seventh Day Adventists or Mormons is 
not conclusive for it still leaves open the question of 
N the specific food factor or factors that were respon- 
sible. ^So let us narrow the field. 

For over two decades there has been a 
steadily-growing group of people who have ac- 
cepted the vitamin theory of cancer and who have 
altered their diets accordingly. They represent all 
walks of life, all ages, both sexes, arid reside in 
almost every advanced nation in the world. It is 
estimated that there are many thousands in the 
United States alone. 2 It is true that there is no way 
to determine their exact number or to conduct clini- 

l The Solution of the Cancer Problem (unpublished manuscript, 1962) 
p. 31. 

2 Dr. Dean Burk, in a letter to Congressman Lou Frey, Jr., dated May 
30, 1972, stated that, jn just the previous twelve month period, he 
personally had been contacted by at least seven hujKjred and fifty 
persons, "including many M.D.* physicians," most of whom were 
"using it merely with prevention of development of cancer in view." 
This experience has been duplicated by many other people 1 , including 
the author, wjio have been exposed to the field of nutritional therapy. 


cal examinations on each of them. But they do 
constitute a rather well-defined group that is both 
vocal and conspicuous. 

It is significant, therefore, that, after starting 
and maintaining a diet rich in vitamin B17, none of 
these people has ever been known to contract 

In the summer of 1973, news spread through 
the health-food grapevine that Adelle Davis, one of 
the nation's best-known nutritionists, a woman 
who was considered to be an expert on the relation- 
ship between diet and cancer — herself was stricken 
with one of its most virulent forms, and in May. of 
the following year it was learned that she passed 
away. It seemed that this was to be the first excep- 
tion to the foregoing statement. But, upon closer 
investigation, in none of her many books or lectures 
did she ever treat nitrilosides as a vitamin or even as 
an essential food substance. She did mention that 
Laetrile was^in her opinion, an effective treatment . 
for cancer after it was contracted, but she appar- 
ently failed to consider it, in its less concentrated 
and more natural form, as vital to one's daily nutri- 
tioif. Even after her cancer had been diagnosed , she 
apparently still did not see the full connection. The 
author corresponded with her on this very question, 
and her reply was, in part, as follows; 

Since carcinogens surround us by the 
hundreds in food preservatives, addi- 
tives, poison sprays^ chejmc^fertilizers, " v - 
pollutants and contaminants of air and 


- water, the statement that cancer is a defi- 
ciency disease is certainly inaccurate and 

It should be stated for the record that this lady 
was an excellent nutritionist. She had helped 
thousands of people regain their health through bet- 
ter diet and more healthful cooking. But it is plain 
that she did not agree with those mentioned previ- 
ously who have, altered their menus to include rich 
nitrijoside foods; and so the unfortunate fact that 
she had contracted cancer is not an exception to the 
blunt statement made a moment ago. 

So let us repeat it. 

While their fellow citizens are suffering from 
cancer at the rate of at least one out of every four, 
hot one of these thousands has ever been known to 
contract this dread disease. 1 

For many persons, the logic of all these facts 
put together is so great that it would Be easy to close 
the case right here. But, in view of the powerful 
opposition against this concept, let us not content 
ourselves only with the logic of the theory. Let us 
reinforce our convictions with the science of the 
theory also, that we may understand why it works 
the way our logic tells us that it must. 

*As will be seen in the following chapters * there are other factors 
involved in the body's natural resistance to cancer — certain pancreatic 
enzymes In particular. It is conceivable, therefore, that one could 
contract cancer in spite of a good nitriloside diet, and, I suppose, 
eventually we will learn of one or two cases. But these certainly will be 
exceptions, and likely will exist in the presence of severe pancrektic 
deficiencies, if, indeed, they occur at all. 





An explanation of the 

trophoblastic thesis of cancer; a 

description of a simple urine test 

j for cancer; an appraisal ofBCG 

vaccine as an anti-cancer agent; 

and a review of the vital role 

played by the pancreas in the 

control of cancer. 

In 1902, John Beard, a professor of embryol- 
ogy at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland, 
authored a paper published in the British /medical 
journal Lancet in which he stated that there were no 
discernible differences between highly-malignant 
cancer cells and certain pre-embryonic cells that 
were quite normal to the early stages of pregnancy. 
In technical terms /these normal cells, are called 
trophoblasts. Extensive research had led Professor 
Beard to the conclusion that cancer and trophoblast 
are, in fact, one in the same. His theory, therefore, 
is known as the trophoblastic thesis of cancer. 1 

The trophoblast in pregnancy indeed does ex- 
hibit all the classical characteristics of cancer. It 

1 Sometimes referred to also as the unitarian thesis of canper on the 
basis that all cancers are, fundamentally, the same. 



spreads and multiplies rapidly as it eats its way into 
the uterus wall preparing a place where the embryo 
can attach itself for maternal protection and 

The trophoblast is formed as a result of a chain 
reaction starting with another cell identified as the 
diploid totipotent. For our purposes let us call this 
simply the "total life" cell because it contains 
within it all the separate characteristics of the com- 
plete organism and has the total capacity to evolve 
into any organ or tissue or, for that matter, into the 
complete embryo itself. 1 

About eighty percent of these total life cells are 
located in the ovaries or testes serving as a genetic 
reservoir for fuUireoffspring. The rest of them are 
distributed elsewhere in the body for a purpose not 
yet fully understood but which may involve the 
regenerative or healing process of damaged or aging 
tissue. - 

The hormone estrogen is well known for its 
ability to effect changes in living tissue. Although it 
is generally thought of as a female hormone, it is 
found in both sexes and performs many vital func- 
tions. Wherever the body is damaged, either by 
physical trauma, chemical action, or illness, es- 

1 There is no need to go into all the details surrounding the formation of 
these cells, for they only tend to confuse us with facts that are not 
essential to an understanding of the basic theory. Anyone interested in 
this background can readily obtain it at the public library from any 
standard reference book on embryology. Of particular value are John 
Beard's The Enzyme Treatment of Cancer and It's Scientific Basis, 
(Chatto <& Windus, London, 191 1) and Charles Gurehot's The Biology 
of Cancer (Friedman, San Francisco, 1948). 


trogen and other steroid hormones always appear in 
great concentration, possibly serving as stimulators 
or catalysts for cellular growth and body repair. 

It is now known that the total life cell is trig- 
gered into producing trophoblast when it comes 
into contact with these steroid hormones acting as 
Organizer stimuli." When this happens to those 
total life cells that have evolved from the fertilized 
egg, the result is a placenta and umbilical cord, a 
means of nourishing the, embryo. But when it oc- 
curs non-sexually as a part of the general healing 
process, the result is cancer. To be more accurate, 
we should say that it is cancer //the healing process 
is not terminated upon completion of its task. 

Hardin B. Jones, Ph.D., in his highly revealing 
"A Report on Cancer," 1 touched upon this 
phenomenon as follows: 

A second important consideration about 
cancer is that all forms of overt cancer are 
associated with a random chance of sur- 
vival which does not lessen with the dura- 
tion of cancer. This strongly implies that 
there is some natural physiological re- 
straint against progress of the disease and 
that the cause of the commonly observed 
rapid development of cancer in the termi- 
nal^stages is the failure of the'natural re- 
straining influence . 

1 Paper delivered before the American Cancer Society's Eleventh An- 
nual Science Writer's Conference, New Orleans, March 7, 1969. 


We shall discuss shortly why this natural re- 
straining influence on the healing process should 
fail," but, for now, at the risk of greatly over- 
simplifying the process, we may say that cancer is 
the result of over-healing. 

We can readily see r therefore, why it has been 
said that smoking, or excessive exposure to the sun, 
or any number of harmful chemicals seem to cause 
cancer. Anything that causes damage to the body 
can lead to cancer if the body's healing processes 
are not functioning properly — as we shall see. 

Dr. Stewart M. Jones of Palo Alto, California, 
has described the process this way: 

Whenever a trophoblast cell appears in 
the body outside of pregnancy, the 
natural forces that control it in a normal 
pregnancy may be absent and, in this 
case, it begins uncontrolled proliferation, 
invasion, extension, and metastasis. 
' ' When this happens, it is initiated by an 
organizer substance, usually estrogen, 
the presence of which further promotes 
the trophoblast activity. This is the be- 
ginning of cancer. 1 

If it is true that the trophoblast cell is brought 
into being by a chain reaction which involves es- 
trogen or other steroid hormones, then it would 
follow logically that an unnaturally high exposure to 


1 "Nutrition Rudiments in Cancer," by S.M. Jones, M.S., B.A., 
Ph.D., M.D., (Palo Alto, California., 1972>p. 6. 


these substances would be a factor that favored the 
onset of cancer. And, indeed, this has been proven 
to be true. The use of diethylstilbestrol as a fatten- 
ing agent for cattle was halted in 1972 because it was 
proven that this steroid, which was present in trace 
amounts in the beef at our grocery stores, had 
caused stomach cancer in experimental rats ? ^ 

It also has been demonstrated that women tak- 
ing contraceptive pills — especially those which are 
predominantly estrogen — not only undergo irrever- 
sible breast changes, but became almost three times 
more cancer-prone than women who do not. This 
fact was stressed by Dr. Otto Sartorius, Director of 
the Cattcer Control Clinic at Santa Barbara Gen- 
eral Hospital in California, who then added: 

Estrogen is the fodder on which car- 
cinoma [cancer] grows. To produce 
cancer in lower animals, you first intro- 
duce an estrogen base. 1 

There is a slight confusion factor in all this due 
to the fact that, occasionally, some cancers appear 
to respond to hormone therapy — the deliberate ad- 
ministration of estrogen or testosterone to the 
cancer patient. But the only cases in which this kind 
of therapy is rewarded with favorable results are 
those involving cancer of the sexual glands, such as 
the breasts or prostate, or those organs that are 

*As quoted in "Birth Control Pills Endanger Your Breasts/* by Ida 
Honorof, Prevention, July, 1972, p. 89. Also see "Pill Linked to 
Cancer Risk,'* LA. Times, Nov. 21, 1972, p. A-21. 

84 WQKL& mmGUT CANCER: Part One 

heavily affected by sexual hormones. Female pa- 
tients are given male hormones and male patients 
are given female hormone s . The apparent favorable 
action is the result of the hormones' attempt to 
oppose or neuter those glands. If the cancer is re- 
tarded, it is because the organ, is retarded. 

The side-effects of this kind of therapy, of 
.. course, are the altering of the sexual physiology of 
the patient. Also, the beneficial results it produces, 
if any, are usually described by physicians as pallia- 
tive, which means that the cancer is not cured, only 
retarded temporarily. But the worst part is that 
— especially in the case, of men using estrogen— the 
presence of unnaturally high levels^ of steroids 
throughout the system could well be a factor favor- 
able to the production of new cancer tissue other 
than at the primary site. 

When cancer begins to form, the body reacts 
by attempting to seal it off and surrounding it with 
cells that are similar to those in the location where it 
occurs. A bump or lump is the initial result. Dr. 
Jones continues: 

In order to counteract the estrogenic ac- 
tion on the trophoblast, the body floods 
. the areas of the trophoblast in a sea of 
beta-glucuronidase (BG) which inacti- 
vates all estrogen on contact . At the same 
time the cells of the tissues being invaded 
by the trophoblasts defensively multiply 
in an effort at local containment. 


Usijally the efforts of the body to control 
the nidus of trophoblast are successful, 
the trophoblast dies, and a benign polyp 
or other benign tumor remains a!s a 
monument to the victory of the body over 
cancer. 1 

Under microscopic examination, many of 
these tumors are found to resemble a mixture or 
hybrid of bpth trophoblast and surrounding cells; a 
fact which has led some researchers to the prema- 
ture conclusion that there are many different types 
of cancer. But the degree to which various tumors 
appear to be different is the same degree to which 
they are benign; which means that it is the degree to 
which there are nofi-cancerous cells-within it. The 
greater the malignancy, the more these, tumors 5 
b$gin to resemble each other, and the more clearly 
they begin to take on the classic characteristics of 
pregnancy trophoblast. And the most malignant of 
all cancers — the chorionepitheliomas— are almost 
indistinguishable from trophoblast cells. For, as 
Dr. Beard pointed out over seven decades ago, they 
are one in the same. 

, An interesting sidelight "to these facts is that 
trophoblast cells produce a distinct hormone that 
readily can be detected in the urine. This is known 
as the chorionic gonadotrophic hormone (CGH). If 
it is true that cancer is trophoblast, then it is logical 
to expect that cancer cells also would secrete this 
hormone. And, indeed, they do. It is als6 true that 

l Ibid., p. 7. 


no other cell is knowp to produce CGH. 1 This 
means that, if CGH is detected in the urine, it- 
indicates that there is present either normal preg- 
nancy trophoblast or abnormal malignant cancer. 
If the patient is a woman, she either is pregnant or 
has cancer. If he is a man, cancer can be the only 

The* significance of this fact is far-reaching. A 
simple urine test similar to the well-known rabbit 
1 test for pregnancy cm detect the' presence of cancer 
long before it manifests itself as illness or a lump, 
and it throws serious doubt upon the rationale be- 
hind surgical biopsies . In fact, many physicians are 
convinced that any cutting into a malignant tumor, 
even for a biopsy, actually increases the likelihood 
that the tumor will spread. (More on that in a later 
chapter.) But, in any event, there is questionable 
need for such procedures in vie wpf the feet that the 
CGH urine test is available and proven to be highly 
accurate. In fact, Dr. Manuel Navarro* Professor 
of Medicine and Surgery at the University of Santo 
To mas in Manilla,, has offered this test to American 
physicians for over a clee^de and reports better than 
95% accuracy with both cancer and non-cancer pa- 
tients. Almost all of the so-called errors have been 
"in showing cancer activity within;patients who pre- 
sumably did not have cancer. But in a large percen- 
tage of these, those same patients later developed 
clinical manifestations of cancer, suggesting that 
the CGH test>was accurate after all. Doctors who 
have had extensive experience with this test have 

*A similar substance is produced in the anterior pituitary gland. 


learned never to assume it is in error when it indi- 
cates the presence of trophoblast. 1 

Let us turn now to. the question of defense 
mechanisms. Before we can hope to conquer 
cancer, first we must understand how- nature 
conquers cancer — how nature protects the body 
and controls the growth of trophoblast cells. 

One would suppose that this would be the 
primary question that determines the direction of all 
cancer research today. Unfortunately , it is not. 
Most contemporary research projects are wrapped 
up in the production of exotic and highly-poisonous 
drugs or high- voltage machines that deliver death 
rays to selected parts of the body. There is no 
counterpart for any of this in nature, and it is small 
wonder that progress has been so disappointing. 
But, recently, a small group of researchers has 
begun to look back to nature, and, if they persist in 
this course, they cannot help but succeed eventu- 
ally. The most promising of all this work lies in the 
field'of the body's natural mechanism for develop- 
ing immunity against disease. 

AH animals contain billions of white blood 
cells. There are different types of white cells includ- 
ing lymphocytes, leukocytes, and monocytes, but 
they all apparently serve the same function which is 
to attack and destroy anything that is foreign and 
harmful to our bodies. Persons who develop a low 
white cell blood count become extremely suscepti- 

^This is a modified, more sensitive miero-Aschheim Zondek test and is . 
not to be confused with the Anthrone test which is based upon a similar 
principle but, due to technical problems connected with the test itself, 
so far has not been as reliable as the CGH test. 


ble to infections of all kinds and, in fact, if the 
condition is sufficiently severe, they 6an die from a 
simple infected cut or a common cold. 

Since the destruction of foreign bodies is the 
function of the white cells, it might seem logical, 
therefore y that they would attack cancer cells also. 
As one medical journal stated the problem recently: 

One crucial property our bodies have is 
* the ability to distinguish between self arid 
non-self. In other words, we can recog- 
nize (biologically) foreign material that 
finds its way into our bodies. This ability 
enables us to fight infections and to build 
up resistance to future infection. It also ^ 
means that organ transplantation is not 
just a simple matter of intricate surgery. 
As far as the body's defense systems- 
— the immunological apparatus— are 
concerned, bacteria, viruses, and trans-r 
. planted organs are all foreign invaders, 
and have to be repelled. 

What has puzzled immunologists for a 
very long time is that, although cancer 
cells are undoubtedly foreign, they seem 
to escape the lethal attentions of im- 
munological systems. The crucial ques- 
tion is, how? 4 


*"N.ew Assaults on Caacer^' vby Roger Le win, World of Research, 
Jan. 13, 1973, p. 32. 


In this otherwise excellent article, we find one 
of the great false assumptions that plagues almost 
all orthodox cancer research today: the assumption 
that cancer cells are foreign to the body. Quite to 
the contrary, they are a vital part of the life cycle 
(pregnancy and healing). Consequently, nature has 
provided them with a highly effective means of 
avoiding the white blood cells. 

One of the characteristics of the trophoblast is 
that it is surrounded by a thin protein coating that 
carries a negative electrostatic charge. In technical 
terms this is called me pericellular sialomucin coat. 
The white blood cells also carry a negative charge. 
And, since similar polarities repel each other, the 
trophoblast is well protected. The blocking factor, 
so-called, is nothing more than a cellular electro- 
magnetic field. 

Commenting on the significance of these facts, 
Dr. Krebs wrote: 

For three-quarters pf a century classical 
immunology has, in effect, been pound- _ . 
ing its head against a stone wall in the vain 
quest for "cancer antigens," the produc- 
tion of cancer antibodies, etc., etc. The 
cancer or trophoblast cell is non- 
' antigenic because of the pericellular 
sialomucin coat; . . .* ~ 

Part of nature's solution to this problem, as 
pointed out by Professor Beard in 19Q5, is found in 

better from Dr. Krebs to Andrew McNaughton, the McNaughton 
Foundation, San Francisco, Calif., dated Aug. 2, 1971. 


the ten or more pancreatic enzymes, of which tryp- 
sin and chymotrypsin are especially important in 
trophoblast destruction. These enzymes exist in 
thek inactive form (as zymogens) in the pancreas 
gland. .Only after they reach the small intestine are 
they converted to their active form. When these, in 
turn, are absorbed into the blood stream and reach 
the trophoblast in sufficient quantity, they eat away 
or digest the negatively-charged protein coat. The 
cancer then is exposed to the attack of the white 
cells and it dies. 1 

In most discussions of this subject, it is as- 
sumed that the lymphocytes are the most active 
counterpart of all the various white blood cells. But 
opinions on this r also, currently are in the state of 
flux. In one recent study,, for example, it was re- 
ported that the real aggressor was the monocyte. 
Although monocytes compose only two or three 
percent of the total, they were found to be far more 
destructive of cancer tissue than the lymphocytes 
which were more numerous. Either way, of course, 
the end result is still the same. 2 

1 The operation of this mechanism is, of course, considerably more 
complex than this simplified description would indicate, and there is 
much that is no't yet fully understood. For instance,' investigators have 
not yet solved the puzzle of how the pregnancy-trqphoblast is protected s 
from chymotrypsin during the initial phase of pregnancy. Obviously 
they have some kind of extra blocking factor, that non-pregnancy 
trophoblast cells do not enjoy. It impossible that it is an increased local 
level of cobalomine that converts the hydro-cyanic acid into thiocyan- 
ate (vitamin B 12), plus a temporarily High level of rhodanese (protecting 
enzyme). But this is not at all certain, and it represents an interesting 
area for future research. 

2 See "Cancer Killing Cells.Found to Eat Tumors," by Harry Nelson, 
jfimes Medical Writer, LA. Times, April 4, 1973, p. 32. 


Starting in 1972 there was a great flurry of 
publicity given to the "promising" experimental 
work done with BGG (the anti-tuberculosis vaccine 
known as Bacillus Galmette Guerin). The theory 
behind it is that the BCG, which actually is a TB 
virus which has been weakened so as to pose no 
serious threat to the patient, stimulates the body's 
production of white blood cells as paftof its natural 
defense mechanism. When the vaccine enters the 
blood stream, the body does not know that the TB 
virus is weak or dead and it begins to produce 
specific combinations of white cells to repel the 
invadfer. These, then, remain as a barrier to any real 
TB virus that may come along in the future. These 
cells not only act as a future barrier against TB but, 
theoretically at least, they also kre presumed to be 
effective against cancer cells. And there have been 
cautious reports of some highly-qualified progress 
in this direction* But, as we have seen, the presence 
of white Cells by themselves is but one part of the 
solution to the cancer problem. Without considera- 
tion of the pancreatic and nutrition factors, real 
progress along these lines will be highly limited. 

Interestingly, many of the reports of success 
with BCG, upon closer examiriation, may have 
been due as much to nutritional factors as anything 
else. For example, one such report appearing in the 
press described the treatment for cancer of one 
physician, Dr. Owen W. Wheeler, by another 
physician, Dr! Virginia Livingston. Dr. Wheeler 
had decided from his own experience that, since the 
conventional methods of cancer therapy were so 


unproductive of results, he would try BCG in- 
stead. So he approached Dr. Livingston who,- at the 
time, was one of the few physicians who knew very 
much about this approach to cancer therapy. The 
article then explained the treatment: 

Dr. Wheeler was injected with BCG and 
put on a strict low-cholesterol diet and 
given antibiotics. The diet, he said, 
banned refined sugar, poultry and eggs, 
and called for raw vegetables, plenty of 
fish and multiple vitamin supplements. 

„ Within two months, the swelling was > 
down; Dr. Wheeler said. 

Recent laboratory tests showed a remis- 
sion of cancerous eells^-that is, a return 
to a normal healthy state— and the pres 1 
ence of new, healthy tissue, he said. 1 

x Let us analyze. The diet given to Dr. Wheeler 
consists of foods that do not consume pancreatic 
enzymes for their digestion. This is similar to the 
kind of diet prescribed by doctors using vitamin B17 
therapy because it releases almost all of the pan- 
creatic enzymes for absorption into the blood 
stream where they can do their work on the cancer 
tell. In addition to this, Dr. Wheeler was given 
"multiple vitamin supplements." It is quite possi- 
ble, therefore, that these two factors were just as 

1 "Vaccine BCG Used With Amazing Success — Brings Complete 
Reversal Of Cancer in Patient With Malignant Neck Tumor," 
National Enquirer^'Nov . 26, 1972. 


important, if not more so, than the administration of 

Returning to the subject of pancreatic en- 
zymes, we find that the trophoblast cells in the 
normal embryo continue to grow and spread right 
up to the eighth week. Then suddenly, with no 
apparent reason, they Stop growing and are de- 
stroyed. Dr. Beard had the general answer to why 
this happens as long ago as 1905. But recent re- 
search has provided the specific explanation. It is in 
the eighth week that the baby's pancreas begins to 

It is significant that the small intestine , near the 
point where the pancreas empties, into it, is one of 
the few places in the human body where cancer is 
almost never found*. The pancreas itself often is 
involved with primary malignancy, but this is be- 
cause the all-important enzymes do not become 
activated -until they leave the panpreas and enter the 
intestines or the blood stream. Thus, the small in- 
testine is bathed in these substances whereas the 
pancreas itself may deceive very little. As one clini- 
cian has observed: 

One of the most striking features about 
the pathology of malignant disease is the 
almost complete absence of carcinoma 
[cancer] in the duodenum [small 
intestine] and-its increasing frequency 
throughout the gastrointestinal tract in 
direct proportion to the distance from this 
exempt segment J 

*Raat*, W.: Klin. Wchnschr, 14:1633, as quoted in The Laetriles, op. 
cit., p. 35. 


We note, also, that diabetics— those who suf- 
fer from a pancreas malfunction— are three times 
more likely to contract cancer than non-diabetics. 1 

These facts, which have puzzled medical in- 
vestigators for years, at last can be explained in 
light of the trophoblastic thesis of cancer. This 
thesis, as. Dr. Krebs has asserted, "is not a dogma 
inflexibly held by its proponents; it is merely the 
only explanation that finds total congruence with all 
established facts on, cancer." 

To which Dr. Stewart M. Jones adds: 

This theory is the oldest, strongest, and 
most plausible theory of cancer now ex- 
tant. It has stood the test of seventy years 
of confrontation with new information 
about cancer without ever being dis- 
proved by any new fact. . , . The vo- 
luminous, heterogenous science of 
cancer developed since then is coherent 
only in the light of this theory. 2 

Actually , it is the height of restraint to continue 
to call this a thesis or % theory. There comes a time 
when prudent men must admit that truth is truth and 
that the basic search is over. For many, "of course, 
the search is more exciting (and infinitely more 
profitable) than the discovery. So they will continue 
to clutter their minds and laboratories with dead- 

Uones, Nutrition Rudiments in Cancer, op. cit., o. 8 
2 Ibid„ pp. 1,6. F 


end theories and projects for as long as the money 
holds out. 

But the truth is both startling and simple. While 
most researchers are pperating on the assumption 
that cancer is foreign to the body and part of a 
process of death and decay, it is, instead, a vital part 
of the life cycle and an expression of the onrush of 
both life and healing. 



The nutritional factor as a 

back-up mechanism to the 

enzyme factor; a biographical 

sketch of Dr. Ernst T. Krebs, Jr. 

and his development of Laetrile; 

the beneficial secondary effects of 

vitamin Bn on a wide range of 

human disorders; jind an 

appraisal of the complexity 

of the total natural 

anti-cancer mechanism. 

As demonstrated in the previous chapter, 
cancer can be thought of as a kind of over-healing 
process in which the body produces trophoblast 
cells as a part of its attempt to overcome specific 
damage to or aging of normal tissue. These tropho- 
blast cells are protected by an electrostatically- 
charged protein coat. But in the presence of suffi- 
cient quantities of the pancreatic enzymes, this pro- 
tective coating is digested away, exposing the 
trophoblast to the destructive force of the body's 
wTiit£_blood cells. Thus, nature has assigned to the 
pancreas the vital job of preventing cancer by keep- 
ing trophoblast cells under control. 

But what happens if, due to age or hereditary 



factors, the pancreas is weak, or if the kinds of 
foods we eat consume almost all of the pancreatic 
enzymes for their digestion leaving very little for 
the blood Stream, or if, due to surgery or radiation, 
there is scar tissue around the cancer which inhibits 
circulation and prevents the enzymes from reaching 
it, or if the rate of cancer growth is so high due to 
massive tissue damage that the pancreatic enzymes 
can't keep up with it? Then what? 

The answer is that nature has provided a 
back-up mechanism, a second line of defense, that 
has an excellent chance of doing the job ev^n if the 
first line should fail. It involves a unique chemical 
compound that literally poisons, the malignant cell 
while nourishing all the rest. And this is where the 
vitamin concept of cancer finally comes back into 
the picture. 

The chemical compound in question, of 
course, is vitamin B17, which is found in those 
natural foods containing nitriloside. It is known 
also as amygdalin and, as such, has been used and 
studied extensively for well over a hundred years. 
But, in its concentrated and purified form de- 
veloped by Dr. Krebs specifically for cancer^ 
therapy, it is known as JLaetrile. For the sake of 
clarity in this volume, however, we shall favor the ° 
more simple name: vitamin B17. 

Professor John Beard, the man who first ad- 
vanced the trophoblastic thesis of cancer, had sus- 
pected that there was a nutritional factor in addition 
to the enzyme factor but was never able to identify 
it. It wasn't until 1952 that this "extrinsic" factor 


was discovered by Dr. Ernst T. Krebs, Jr., and his 
famous father of the same name. 

During the great flu epidemic of 1918 which 
took the lives of over ten million Americans, Dr. 
Krebs, Sr., was able to save almost 100% of the 
hundreds of patients who came under his care. As 
both a graduate pharmacist and an accredited 
physician practising in Nevada, he had taken a keen 
interest in the fact that the Washoe Indians of that 
area enjoyed almost complete freedom from the^ 
respiratory diseases of the white man. He discov- 
ered that their native remedy for such ailments 
was called ' ' Dortza Water, ' ' a decoction of the root 
of a wild parsley-like plant, known botanically as 
Leptdtaenia Dissecta. He experimented with this 
herb, devised more efficient methods to extract the 
active ingredients, and discovered that it possessed 
amazing antiseptic and healing properties. It was 
• this extract that was used to save the lives of his 
patients during the epidemic of 1 9 1 8 . 

Thus Dr. Krebs, Sr. in 1918 was the first to 
introduce and use an antibiotic in scientific 
medicine. At that time, however, even the claim for 
the possibility of an antibiotic or "internal ger- 
micide" that would kill bacteria without^harming 
the body was considered preposterous. The 
Journal of the American Medical Association on 
June 5, 1920, dismissed these claims out of hand. 
Thirty years passed before Carlson and Douglas of 
the We'sterrr Reserve University in Cleveland, 
Ohio, rediscovered leptoniri — the antibiotic in the 
roots of Leptotaenia — and published their findings 


in the Journal of Bacteriology in May of 1948. Their 
summary reads: 

The antibiotic activity of oil fractions 

from the root of Leptotaenia dissecta was 
determined on 62 strains and species of 
bacteria, molds and fungi. The . . . agent 
was bactericidal for/gram-pOsitive bac- 
teria . . . and gram-negative bacteria. 

•> In 1953 scientists at the University of Utah 
School of Medicine published a number of papers 
on "Studies on Antibiotic Extract of 
Leptotaenia". 1 Even the effect Dr. Krebs, Sr. 
claimed for leptonin against flu viruses was con- 
firmed in the case of the Pr-8 flu virus in embryon- 
ated eggs. The reality of leptonin as a broad spec- 
trum antibiotic had now become so well established 
that the Department of Bacteriology at the Univer- 
sity of Southern California School of Medicine 
granted a student a master's degree in microbiology 
for its study. The same student, Daniel Everett 
Johnson, later obtained his doctorate in microbiol- 
ogy at the University of California at Los Angeles 
School of Medicine in 1953 on the basis of his tfyesis 
showing the antibiotic action of leptonin against 
hundreds of different microorganisms. 

Dr. Krebs, Sr., also had taken an early interest 
in catacer. He noticed that here, too, this appeared 
to be primarily a white man's disease. Renumber- 
ing the lesson of "Dortza Water," he suspected 

Antibiotics and Chemotherapy (3 (4) 393),. 1953. 


that the key probably was hidden either in an herb 
or in the food itself. The final discovery, however, 
was made, not by him, but by his son who, by that 
time, had become totally wrapped up in the search 
for an answer to the cancer riddle. 

Dr. Ernst T. Krebs, Jr., initially had wanted to 
follow in his father's footsteps and practice 
medicine. At one. time he even had enrolled in med- 
ical school, but the deeper he became involved with 
science the more convinced he was that his primary 
interest lay, not in the treatment of patients^ but in 
the worla Qf medical chemistry. So after three years 
qf anatomy and medicine at Hahnemann Medical 
College in Philadelphia, he changed his direction 
and became, not a medical doctor, but a Doctor of 

He pursued much of his undergraduate work at 
the University of Illinois between 1938 and 1941. 
Specializing in bacteriology, he received his 
Bachelor's Degree at the University of Illinois in 
1942.^ He did graduate work at the University of 
California from 1943 to 1945, and later at the Uni- 
versity of ^Mississippi, researching mostly in phar- 
macology during that period. He is the author of 
many scientific papers including "The Unitarian or 
Trophoblastic Thesis of Cancer," and "The Ni- 
trilosides in Plants and Animals." He is the reci- 
pient of numerous honors and doctorates both at 
home and abroad. He is the science director of the 
John Beard Memorial Foundation. He is the disco- 
verer of vitamin Bis (pangamic acid — not the same 
as B17), which has proven to be an important ad- 


junctive therapy in the treatment of many illnesses 
related to impaired circulation. 

Early in his student work, Dr. Krebs became 
familiar with the trophoblastic thesis of cancer ad- 
vanced by Professor John Beard. Working within 
the context of this theory, and encouraged by Dr. 
Charles Gurchot, a professor of pharmacology at 
the University of California Medical School, he 
began a search for the nutritional factor hinted at by 
Beard. ^ 

By J950 he had identified the specific composi- 
tion of this substance, had isolated it into crystalline 
form, and given it the name Laetrile, 1 and had 
tested it on animals to make sure it was not toxic. 
The next st$p was to prove that it was not harmful 
to humans. There was only one way to do that, of 
course. So he rolled up his sleeve and injected it into 
his own bloodstream! 

Just as he had predicted, there were absolutely 
no harmful or distressing side effects. He was now 
ready for the final state of experiments — cancer 
patients themselves. 

The B17 molecule contains two units of glucose 
(sugar), one of benzaldehyde, and one of cyanide, 
all tightly locked together within it. As everyone 
knows, cyanide can be highly toxic and even fatal if 
taken in sufficient quantity. However, locked as it 
is injhi& natural state, it is completely inertchemi- 
cally and has absolutely no effect on^iving tissue. 

1 The material was derived from apricot kernels. Because it was 
faevorotatory (left-handed) to polarized light, and because chemically 
it was a "Mandelo-nkri/e," the first and last syllables were united to 
produce the word Laetrile. 


By way of analogy, chlorine gas also is known to be 
deadly. But when the chlorine is chemically bound 
together with sodium forming sodium chloride, it is 
a relatively harmless compound known as common 
table salt. 

There i^ only one substance that can unlock the 
B17 molecule and release the cyanide. That sub- 
stance is an enzyme called beta-glueosidase \ which 
we shall call the "unlocking enzyme." 1 When B17 
comes in contact with this enzyme in the presence 
of water, not only is the cyanide released, but also 
the benzaldehyde, which is highly toxic by itself. In 
fact, these two wpirking together are at least a 
hundred times more poisonous than either of them 
separately; a phenomenon known in biochemistry 
as synergism. 2 

Fortunately, the unlocking enzyme is not 
found to any dangerous degree anywhere in the 
body except at the cancer cell, where it always is 
present in great quantity, sometimes at levels in 
excess of one hundred times that of the surrounding 
normal cells. The result is that vitamin B17 is un- 
locked at the cancer cell, releases its poisons to the 
cancer cell, and only to the cancer cell. 

1 This is a generic term that can be^applied to a category or grouping of 
enzymes that act on the vitamin in its natural state. The specific one 
that appears to be responsible for the unlocking action on ihe syn- 
thesized Bi7 known as Laetrile is beta glucuronidase. 
2 In passing, it is interesting to note that nature has used this same 
synergism as a defense mechanism for the poisonous .millipede found in 
Louisiana and Mississippi. The creature is equipped with paired glands 
located tfn eleven of its segments. When threatened, it ejects cyanide 
and benzaldehyde from these glands with a deadly effectiveness that is_ 
well known. See "Secretion of Benzaldehyde and Hydrogen Cyanide 
by the Millipede Pachydesmus Crassicutis," Scfe/ie*, 138:513, 1962. 


There is another important enzyme called 
rhodanese, which we shall identify as the "protect- 
ing enzyme." 1 The reason is th$t it has the ability to 
neutralize cyanide by converting it instantly into 
by-products tjiat actually are beneficial and essen- 
tial to health. This enzyme is found in great quan- 
tities in every part of the body except the cancer cell 
which, consequently, is not protected. 2 

Now let us examine what, at first, may appear 
to be exceptions to these rules. We have said that 
the unlocking enzyme is not found to any dangerous 
degree anywhere in the body except at the cancer 
cell. This is true, but please note the phrase "to any 
dangerous degree." The fact is that the unlocking 
enzyme actually is found in various concentrations 
everywhere in the human body. It is particularly 
prevalent in the healthy spleen, liver, and endocrine 
organs. In ajl of these instances, however, there 
also is present an even greater quantity of the pro- 
tecting enzyme (rhodanese). The healthy tissue is 
protected, therefore, because the excess of this pro- 
tecting enzyme completely neutralizes the effect of 
the unlocking enzyme. 

The malignant cell by comparison not only has 
a greater concentration of the unlocking enzyme 
than found in most normal cells but it is totally 

*Since about 1965 rhodanese has been identified in technical literature 
as thiosulfate transulfurase . 

2 Of necessity, this is a greatly condensed and simplified explanation of 
a rather complex biochemical chain reaction involving many inter- 
mediate stages. For those interested in a more technical evaluation, 
refer to Suggested Mechanisms of Action of Vitamin Bn, by Charles 
Gurchat, Ph.D., reprinted jn the Appendix of this book. 


lacking in the protecting enzyme. Thus, it is singu- 
larly vulnerable to the release of cyanide and ben- 

The non-cancerous organs, therefore, are en- 
dowed by nature with the unique capacity of pro- 
tecting themselves and even nourishing themselves 
from the digestion of the B17 molecule, whereas 
cancerous tissue converts the same vitamin sub- 
stance into powerful toxins against which it has no 

With this in mind, it is amusing to watch the 
scientific "experts" who oppose Laetrile reveal 
their abysmal ignorance and arrogahce on thfs sub- 
ject. In the 1963 report of the California Cancer 
Advisory Commission, for example, we read: 

The opinion of Dr. Jesse P. Greenstein, 
chief of thejaboratory of biochemistry at 
the National Cancer Institute was ob- - 
tained in respect to the distribution of 
. beta-glucuronidase in neoplastic [cancer] 
and non- neoplastic [healthy] tissues, and 
as to the implication that there was a 
"tumor" beta-glucuronidase [unlocking] 
enzyme. The fact is, reported Doctor 
Greenstein, that beta-glucuronidase is . 
found in all tissues of the animal 
body. . . . In other words, there is much 
more "normal" beta-glucuronidase than 
"tumor" beta-glucuronidase in any ani- 
mal body. In a letter dated November 10, 
1952, Dr. Greenstein wrote "Such 


statement as ... 'the malignant cell ... 
is virtually an island surrounded by a 
sea of beta-glucuronidase\ is sheer 
nonsense. 1 

Dr. <3reen$tein is perfectly •correct in observ- 
ing that the unlocking enzyme is found in all tissue 
of the animal body, but he is one hundred percent in 
error when he tries to scoff at its abundance within 
and around the malignant cell. His lack of exper- 
tise, however, is made abundantly clear by the fact 
that apparently he is totally unaware of the corre- 
sponding presence and cjounter-^ction of the pro- 
tecting enzyme in these tissues. He is castigating as 
"shqer nonsense" a bio chemical mechanism of 
which he apparently is totally ignorant. 

Dr. Otto Warburg received the Nobel Prize for 
proving that cancer cells obtained nourishment, not 
through oxidation as do other cells, but through 
fermentation of sugar. Warburg explained: 

From the standpoint of physics and 
chemistry of life, this difference between 
normal and cancer cells is so great that ' 
one can^scarcely picture a greater differ- 
ence. Oxygen gas, the donor of energy in 
plants and animals, is dethroned in the 
cancer cells arid replaced by an energy- 
yielding reaction pf the lowest living 
forms; namely, a fermentation of 
glucose. 2 

x Op. cit., pp.- 14, 15. 

2 As quoted in Prevention, May 1968. 


From this it is easy to see why anything that 
improves normal respiratory metabolism is au- 
tomatically an inhibitor to cancer growth. The im- 
portant point here, however, is that any benzal- 
dehyde that might diffuse away from the cancer cell 
and come into contact with normal cells, will be 
oxidized and converted into harmless benzoic acid. 
Benzoic acid is known to have certain anti- 
rheumatic, antiseptic, and analgesic properties. 
This could well partially account for the fact that 
B17 produces the unexpected effect of relieving the 
intense pain associated with terminal cancer, and 
does so without the aid of narcotics. Although not a 
pain reliever per se, when it comes in contact with' 
cancer cells, it releases benzoic acid right at the 
inflicted location and, thus, bathes that area with a 
natural analgesic. 1 Meanwhile, the benzaWehyde 
that remains at the cancer cell will find itself in an 
almost total lack of oxygen causing it to linger and 
perform its deadly synergistic action for a pro- 
longed period of time. 

On the other hand, if a small amount of cyanide 
should diffuse into adjacent normal cells, it is con- 
verted by the enzyme rhodanese, in the presence of 
sulphur, into thiocyanate which, as stated previ- 
ously, is perfectly harmless. But, more than that* 
thiocyanate is known as a natural regulator of blood 
pressure. It also serves as a metabolic pool for the 
body's, self-production of vitamin B12 or 

1 It is the opinion of Laetrile clinicians, however^ that Xheprimary cause 
of pain reduction\probably is due to the direct act of halting the tumor's 
invasion and destruction of healthy tissue. 


cyanocobatamin, a substance essential for health. 
It comes as a great surprise for many to learn that 
cyanide is an essential and integral part of vitamin 
B12 as well as B17. 1 

Another unexpected but welcome conse- 
quence of vitamin B17 Is that it stimulates the hemo- 
globin or red blood cell count. As long ago a$ 1933 it 
Was shown that exposure to small amounts of 
cyanide gas produced this effect in mice, 2 but only 
since the work begun by Dr. Krebs has this also 
been demonstrated in humans as a result of the 
internal chemical action of Laetrile. 

Other experiments have indicated that trace 
amounts of cyanide and benzaldehyde released in 
the mouth and intestine, far from being cause for 
panic, actually are a part of the delicate balance of 
nature and serve entirely beneficial purposes. In 
the mouth and stomach these chemicals apparently 
attack the bacteria associated with tooth decay and 
bad breath. In the intestines they interact with the 
bacterial micro-flora to suppress or eliminate the 
flatulence long associated with westernized foods. 

Perhaps the most interesting sidelight of all, 
however, is the probable connection between vita- 
min B17 and the modern black man's disease, 
sickle -cell anemia. In Africa, the Negro race has 
developed sicklle cells in the blood apparently as a 
natural immunity faotor to malaria. The develop-. 

'Vitamin B12 is not produced in plant tissue. It is the product of animal 
metabolism in which the cyanide radical is combined with hy- 
drocobalamin (Bi2a) to form cyanocobalamin (B12). 

2 Maxwell and Bischoff, Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental 
Therapy, 49:270. 


ment of this trait was dependent, in part, on the rich 
nitrilosidic content of the native African diet. Once 
the black man began to migrate into the modern 
cities of America and Europe, his eating habits 
were changed drastically and suddenly. The result 
is the painful hemolytic crisis caused by the clump- 
ing of the red ceils. It already has been learned that 
this disease can be ameliorated by cyanate tablets. 
But cyanate also can be produced by vitamin B17 
acting within the body, and it seems logical to as-, 
sume that this is the way nature intended it to be 
taken. 1 

Let us pause, then, and reflect on the signifi- 
cance of these indicators. Is it possible that the 
rheumatic diseases, certain aspects of hypertension 
or high-blood pressure, tooth decay, much of our 
gastrointestinal disorders, sickle-cell anemia — and 
cancer — all are related directly or indirectly to a 
simple vitamin B17 deficiency? And if this is possi- 
ble, what then of the other non-infectious diseases 
that plague mankind and puzzle medical research? 
Could their solutions also be found in the field of 
nutrition rather than drugs? 

Having asked those reflective questions, 
which, unfortunately, may not be fully answered 
for decades, let us return to, the main topic 
—cancer— and to the realm of those questions for 
which we do have answers . It is no longer a specula- 
tion but a fact supported by a mountain of evidence 

Since over 50,000 black Americans now are suffering from this dis- 
ease, it is a topic of prime concern and importance. For that reason, we 
lave included in the appendix of this volume the excellent paper 
entitled "Sickle-Cell Anemia and Vitamin B17 Metabolites" by Robert 
3. Houston. 


that vitamin B17 is a vital part of an amazing bio- 
chemical process that destroys cancer cells while, 
at the same time, nourishing and sustaining non- 
cancer cells. 

Every person possesses-trophoblast cells as a 
result of the continuing and normal regeneration 
process. These, however, are held in check by a 
metabolic barrier consisting of the pancreatic en- 
zyme chymotrypsin and the nitriloside food factor 
vitamin B17. This barrier is an intricate and perfect 
mechanism of nature that simply could not have 
been accidental. 

As mentiohed in the previous chapter, there is 
much speculation today about carcinogens — the 
things that supposedly cause N cancer. We are told 
that smoking or extensive exposure to the sun, or 
chemical additives to our food, or even certain vi- 
ruses all can cause cancer. But, as we have seen, 
the real cause is an enzyme and vitamin deficiency. 
These other things merely are the specific triggers 
that start the process. 

Anything that produces prolonged stress or 
damage to the body can initiate the healing process. 
If this goes unchecked because the body Jacks the 
necessary chemical ingredients to restore the 
equilibrium, then the result is cancer. 

. Specific carcinogens, therefore, like smoking 
or viruses, do not cause cancer, they merely deter- 
mine where it is going to occur. 

We must understand afso that nature's de- 
fenses against cancer include more than just the 
pancreatic enzymes and vitamin B17. For exam- 


pie, doctors in Europe have reported that 
hyperthermy — the deliberate raising of the patients' 
body temperature — has increased the effectiveness 
of vitamin therapy so greatly as to suggest another 
synergism, as between cyanide arid benzaldehyde. 
They tell us that when the body temperature is 
rai.sed from its normal thirty-seven degrees centig- 
rade^ to forty-one degrees, there is a gain in effect of 
from three to ten-fold. In other words, at forty-one 
degrees, three to ten times lower concentrations of 
Laetrile are required for a given anti-cancer effect 
in a given period of time. It is possible that the 
fermentive function of the cancer cell is impaired by 
the increased oxygenation and circulation cus- 
tomarily associated with fever. 

Along this line, it is interesting to note also that 
Dr. Wilfrid Shute (the world-famous champion 
of vitamin E therapy for heart patients) reports that, 
for some reason, his patients who are on massive 
doses of E do not appear to contract cancer at the 
same rate, as other patients. Nobel Prize winner 
Dr. Linus Pauling has suggested that vitamin C 
might also have value as an anti-cancer agertt. 1 Dr. 
Umberto Saffiotti of the National Cancer Institute 
has. blocked lung cancer in mice with vitamin A. 2 
And, as reported in the October, 1971, issue of 
Biochemical News, massive oral doses of vitamin B 
reduced the growth of cancer in experimental mice 
by as much as seventy percent. 

1 "Linus Pauling Defends Vitamin C Claims Against 'Double Stan- 
dardy Berkeley Gazette, Nov. 6, 1971. 

2 "Is There An Anti-Cancer Food?" by Gena Larsen, Prevention, 
April, 1972. 


So it is plain to see that there is much yet to be 
learned, and no one claims that vitamin B17 is the 
whole answer. In addition to hyperthermy, vita- 
mins A, B, C,and E, it is possible that an important 
role also may be played by other enzymes, other 
vitamins, and even PH levels. Vitamin B17 seems to 
be the most vital and direct-acting of all these fac- 
tors, but none of them can be ignored, for they are 
an interlocking part of the total natural mechanism. 

Fortunately, it is not necessary for man to un- 
derstand fully every minute theoretical aspect of 
this mechanism in order to make it work for him. 
The necessity of eating foods rich in all the vitamins 
and minerals — particularly vitamin B 17— and of 
minimizing prolonged damage or stress to the body 
is all that he really needs to know. 1 

1 An excellent guide to the preparation of foods rich in vitamin Bnis 
June de Spain* s The Little Cyanide Cookbook (American Media, 
Thousand Oaks, Calif., 1975). 



A newspaper^account of a couple 

~ who reportedly were poisoned by 

eating apricot' kernels; a close 

look at the real facts in this case; 

an evaluation of the toxic 

potential of seeds containing Bn; 

a common sense rule for eating 

same; and the clinical 

evidence that Laetrile is less 

toxic than sugar. 

On September 1, 1972, the California State 
Health Department released its Monthly Morbidity 
Report to the medical profession and to the press. It 
contained an entry about a Los Angeles couple who 
were treated for "cyanide poisoning" after eating 
thirty: apricot kernels. On September 4, the Los 
Angeles Examiner ran a UPI dispatch under the 
CYANIDE. And six days later, th^ New York 
Times ran a similar story: APRICOT KERNELS 

All Americans had been warned — and 
scared— to stay jaway from those seeds! For those 
who were only vaguely familiar with the story of 
Laetrile, it was a near knock-out blo\y to the use of 
vitamin B17. And, as shall be demonstrated in a 

113 _ 


following chapter, it is likely that it was intended to 
be just that. 

In response to this news story, Mi*. Jay 
Huchinson, a former cancer patient who attributes 
his recovery to Laetrile, dashed off the following 
letter, airmail special delivery, to Mohammed 
Jamel Khan, Mir of Hunza: 

Dear Mir and Rhani of Hunza: 

I am rushing-this extremely urgent warn- 
ing to you so that you can take immediate 
steps to notify your government and your- 
people of the health hazard reported by 
the California State Department of Pub- 
• lie Health during the week of September 
3, 1972. 1 enclose articles from San Fran 
cisco newspapers .... 

Mir, you must get your people to stop 
eating those pits ! Stop making flour out of 
them! Stop feeding your new-born infants 
the oil, and r for Mohammed's sake, stop 
anointing them with it! . . . 

' Please write soon, and when you do, 
would you mind telling us why your peo- 
ple are among the healthiest in the world, 

- and why your men and women live vigor- 
ous lives well into their 90' s, and why you 
and your beautiful people never get 
cancer? 1 

r Quoted in "Of Apricot Pits and Hunzalaiid," by Mike Culbert, 
Berkeley Daily Gazette, August 13, 1972. 


For most people, however, the sarcasm was 
completely lost. They took the story of the 
poisoned couple with deadly seriousness. Many 
who had heard that these seeds might be helpful 
against cancer, but who. did not understand the 
chemistry involved, now were afraid to use them 
and were filled with doubts. An over-zealous health 
department in Hawaii confiscated all apricot seeds 
from the shelves of health food stores, and most of 
the stores on the mainland were intimidated — br 
confused — into dropping them from their line. The 
"news" story had served its purpose well. - 

Suspecting that there might be more to the 
story than met the eye, this writer attempted to get 
more details from the Department of Health — 
particularly the names of the couple in question. 
But it seemed that the department .did not want 
them questioned. Dr. Ralph W. Weilerstein, the 
California Public Health Medical Officer, Bureau 
of Food and Drug, replied: "We regret that the 
confidentiality of morbidity reporting precludes 
interviewing the patients^vtfho were poisoned in Los 
Angeles." 1 

Dr. Dean Burk of the National Cancer Insti- 
tute apparently was able to get more information. In 
a letter dated December 13, 1972, he explained: 
~"~ / 
This couple from Los Angeles ... re- 
ally got sick and were treated in an 
emergency hospital, following ingestion 
by mouth of an overnight brew made from 

better to author, dated Sept. 20, 1972. 


apricot nuts, apricot fruit, and distilled 
water — a concoction that probably fer- 
mented somewhat overnight, and was 
undoubtedly very bitter, and which 
brought on the illness (nausea, vomiting, 
etc.) after* "about an hour," which is 
rather long for cyanide, which usually 
acts within minutes of being swallowed. 
Mr. Murray [of the Los Angeles County 
Health Department] was not willing to 
commit himself that cyanide was the chief 
cause of the illness, from which it would 
appear they promptly recovered. He said 
"that under the circumstances . . . you 
don't want to leap to conclusions and say 
that their illness was definitely due to the 
ingestion of amygdalin . . . . I don't think 
I could personally say that I proved that 
their illness was due to apricot kernels." 

It is interesting, of course, that, some- 
how, out of the, I presume, thousands of 
items in the California Monthly Morbid- 
ity Reports, the Murray-Chinn material 
on amygdalin [the story of the Los 
Angeles couple] made the press through- 
out the country — presumably with the 
help and guidance of the state health au- 

Mr. Gray has written, in an incipient arti- 

. cle, "The health department's approach 

has been to discredit Laetrile without 


ever mentioning it directly. They have 
gotten the cooperation of the press when 
reporters have not gone beyond the 
offices of the health department in writing 
their stories." 1 

In another letter, dated December 20, 1972, 
Dr. Burk expanded his views £ven further: 

The facts are that a very considerable 
number of people eat 10-20 apricot ker- 
nels throughout a day, and after awhile, 
even 50- 1 00 kernels safely, though hardly 
all at once as the . . . Angeleno gas- 
tronomes actually did. The same general 
/situation holds with respect to a large 
number of ordinary foods that ca,n be 
. poisonous or allergic, etc. , such as straw- 
berries, onions, shrimps, and so on, that 
are never removed en masse or in toto, 
from food store shelves by health agen- 
cies imbued with the spirit of 1984 .... 

It is one thing for a health agency to warn 
people against foolish and rare actions 
. wkh respect to any aspect of health, and 
quite another to totally deprive people of 
excellent food quite safe if ingested in a 
normal common sense way observed by 
99.999% of the population. 2 

'Letter from Dr. Dean Burk to Mr. M. Standard, Attorney-at-Law, 
dated Dec. 13, 1972. 

2 Letter from Dr. Dean Burk to Mr. B. Stenjen, President of the 
Waikiki Chapter of the National Health Federation, dated December 
20, 1972. . 


We have said that vitamin B17 is harmless to 
non-cancer cells. This is true, but perhaps it would 
be more accurate to say it is as harmless as any 
substance can be. After all, even life-essential 
water or oxygen can be fatal if taken in unnaturally 
large doses. And this is true also of vitamin B 17. For 
instance, there normally is a very small amount of 
beta-glucosidase (the "unlocking" enzyme) found 
within the seeds of most nitriloside fruits. This en- 
zyme, when activated by the secretions "of the 
mouth and stomach, causes a minute amount of 
cyanide and benzaldehyde to be released in these 
locations. As mentioned previously, the presence 
v of limited amounts of these chemicals in the mouth, 
stomach, and intestines, is not dangerous and, in 
fact, appears to be part of an intended delicate 
chemical balance of nature, the absence of which 
can contribute to tooth decay, bad breath, and all 
kinds of gastrointestinal disorders. But what hap- 
pens if these seeds are eaten in gigantic quantities? 

There is oiie case of a man who, reportedly, 
died from devouring almost a cup of apple seeds. 
Incidentally, the cas^ never has been authenticated 
and could well be entirely fictitious; but assuming 
it's true, if the man had qaten the apples also, he 
would have obtained enough extra rhodanese (the 
"protecting enzyme'*) from the fleshy part of the 
fruit to offset the effect of even that many seeds in 
his stomach. But that would have required that he 
eat several cases of apples which, of course, would 
have been impossible in the first place. 

It should be noted that, in a few places in the 
world, there are certain strains of apricot trees that 



produce seeds containing ten times the concentra- 
tion of nitriloside found in those trees grown in the 
United States. Even these seeds are not dangerous, 
of course, when eaten in reasonable quantity and 
with the whole fruit, but when eaten as seeds only, 
and in large quantity, they can present a danger. In 
Hunza, the first fruit of all new apricot trees is 
tested by the elders for extreme bitterness. 1 If it is 
found to be so — which is very rare — the tree is 
destroyed. . ; 

Occasionally, these unusual trees are found 
also in Turkey. But here, they are not destroyed 
because the seed is considered to be "good for 
health." As a result, there have been one or two 
cases in Turkey where little children have mistaken 
the seeds from the "wild apricot" to be those from 
the domestic variety, and they have become ill or 
died. But even in Turkey this is extremely rare. In 
the United States, of course,, there is no record of 
such trees even having been in existence. 

During a public lecture on the subject of Lae- 
trile, Dr.JE.T. Krebs, Jr., was asked by a woman in 
the audience if there was any danger from eating too 
many seeds containing the B17 factor. Here was his 

This is an excellent question. In fact, it 
sometimes illustrates the indwelling cus- 
sedness of the human spirit. If we eat the 
seed with the whole fruit, it is impossible v 
for us to get an excess of nitrilosides from 

l All nitriloside-bearing seeds are bitter to the taste buds of westernized 
man. But when the Hunzakuts say a seeil is bitter, it's bitter! 


the seeds. On the other hand, if we take 
apples, throw away all of the fruit, and 
collect half a cup of apple seeds, and de- 
cide to eat that half cup of apple seeds, 
there is a possibility we can suffer seri- 
ously from an overdose of cyanide .... 

You can't eat enough peaches or apricots 
or prunes or cherries or apples to get a 
. sufficient amount of seeds to provide a 
toxic quantity of nitrilosides, but you can 
take a part of the plant and do so. 1 

Dr. Krebs further pointed out that roasting, 
these seeds does 1 not impair the vitamin B17 factor, 
but it does destroy the unlocking enzyme. So, those- 
who are overly concerned about this matter can 
take the added precaution of roasting their seeds 
before eating. 2 It should be remembered, however, 
that this is not the way nature intended them to be 
consumed and, by so doing, we lose whatever bene- 
fit there may be from chemical activity in the 
mouth, stomach, and intestines. 

The amount of nitriloside needed by the body 
is an unknown quantity. Perhaps it never can be 
determined for, surely, it will vary depending on the 
person — his age, sex, condition of pancreas, diet, 
weight, and hereditary factors. That is why it is 
absurd for anyone to try to publish or decree by law 

^Text of remarks published in the Cancer News Journal, Sept./Dec, 
~1970, pp.7, 8. 

2 For those who want to do this, Dr. Krebs suggests roasting for thirty 
to fifty minutes at 100° centigrade or 212° fahrenheit to de-activate the 
beta glucosidase. 


the so-called Minimum Daily Requirements 
(MDR's) or Recommended Daily Allowances 
(RDA's), as they now are called. 

Also, there is a tendency to think of deficiency 
diseases as either existing or not existing, with noth- 
ing in between. We either have scurvy 6r we don't. 
This can be terribly misleading. Actually, scurvy is 
the extreme form of a vitamin C deficiency. A lesser 
form may not reveal the classic symptoms of scurvy 
but could well manifest itself as fatigue, susceptibil- 
ity tor infection, and other non-fatal maladies. 

World-famous biologist, Albert Szant- 
Gyorgyi, phrased it this way: 

Scurvy is not the first symptom of 
deficiency. It is a sign of the final collapse 
of the organism, a pre-mortal syndrome, 
and there is a very wide gap between 
scurvy and a completely healthy 
condition .... 

If, owing to inadequate food v you con- 
tract a cold and die of pneumonia, your 
diagnosis will be pneumonia, not malnu- 
trition, and chances are that your doctor 
will have treated you only for 
pneumonia. 1 

Likewise, it is impossible to know what health 
problems, short of cancer, may be caused by a 
partial vitamin Bn deficiency. So, when in doubt, 

l The Living State; With Observations on Cancer (Academic Press, 
N.Y. & London, 1972) p. 77. 


most observers agree that it is best to err in the 
direction of surplus. 

Dr. Krebs has suggested a minimum level of 
fifty milligrams of B17 per day for a normal healthy 
adult. Naturally, one who is pre-disposed to cancer 
would require more, and one who already was 
afflicted with the disease would need much more. 

The average apricot seed grown in the United 
States contains approximately four or five milli- 
grams of B17. But this is an average figure only and 
can vary as much as by a factor of six, depending on 
the size of the kernel, the type of tree, the climate, 
and soil conditions. Buf, using theaverage figure, 
we can see that it would take ten to twelve apricot 
kernels per day to obtain fifty milligrams of B17. 

Is this a dangerous quantity? Hardly. There 
are cases reported in which people eat eightyrfive to 
one hundred apricot kernels every day with no ill 
effects. Let us hasten to point out, however, that 
this is not a recommended dosage. Since it is possi- 
ble for these kernels to vary in nitriloside content by 
as much as six to one, it is conceivable that 
eighty-five kernels from one tree could be the same 
as over five hundred kernels from another tree. 

Nature can only do so much. It cannot antici- 
pate excess of this kind. Therefore, it is wise to 
follow the simple rule that one should not eat at one 
time more seeds of any kind than he likely could 
consume if he also were eating a reasonable quan- 
tity of the whole fruit. This is a common sense rule, 
with a large safety margin that can be followed with 
complete confidence. 

There is no chemical substance in nature that 


has been more misunderstood than cyanide. There 
has developed over the years an ignorance border- 
ing on superstition dating back to the early days of 
science when it was first discovered that cyanide 
had a toxic potential. This ancient misapprehension 
has been perpetuated right up td the present time so 
that, to the average person, the word cyanide is 
synonymous with poison. As a result, we have de- 
veloped a cultural antipathy toward this substance 
whenever it is discovered in our. food. Every effort 
has been made to eliminate it. Local health agencies 
swarm over our grocery shelves to make sure that it 
does not reach us, and the federal Food and Drug 
Administration even has promulgated laws that 
make it illegal to sell any substance containing more 
of it- than one four-hundreths of one percent! 1 
With that kind of "protection," it is small wonder 
that the American people are victims of the ful- 
minating deficiency disease knowa as cancer* 

So much for the cyanide in natural foods. What 
about the laboratory forms of vitamin B 17 known as 
amygdalia- or Laetrile? The answer is that here 
^here is even less cause for concern. For over a. 
hundred years standard pharmacology reference 
books have described this substance as non-toxic. 
After almost two centuries of use in all parts of the 
world, there never has been even one reported case 
of related death or serious illness. 

Amygdalin generally is said to have been first 
discovered in 1830 by the German chemist Leibig. 
According to the American Illustrated Medical 

*See "Requirements of the United States Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 
Act," FDA Publication No. 2, Revised June, 1970, p. 26. 



Dictionary (1944 Edition) amygdalin means "like 
an almond," suggesting that the material from 
which the first sample was isolated was the bitter 
almond seed. 1 In one form or another, it has been 
used and studied almost constantly since that time 
and, according to Dr. Burk, "More is known chemr 
ically and pharmacologically about amygdalin than 
most drugs in general use." It was listed in phar- 
macopoeias by 1834. Toxicity studies were con- 
ducted with it on dogs as early as 1848. By 1907 it 
was listed in the Merck Index. And in 1961 it ap- 
peared in the Chinese- Korean Herbal Phar- 
macopoeias by Sun Chu Lee and Yung Chu Lee 
describing its reported use specifically for "cancer 
dissqlution." 2 

Like many chemical compounds^ amygdalin 
may exist in several different crystalline forms. 
Which form it takes depends on the number of 
molecules of water that are incorporated into it. 
Regardless of the form, however, once the crystals 
are dissolved, they all yield one and the same 
amygdalin.^ .^ 

The particular type of amygdalin crystal de- 
veloped by Dr. Krebs, known as Laetrile, is unique 
because it is considerably more soluble than any of 
the other forms and, thus, can be administered to 

1 In the Unjted States the commercial or "sweet" almonds contain no 
vitamin Bw. The * 'bitter*' almonds, however, are very rich in this 
substance — even more rich than apricot kernels. But partly due to the 
American preference for the flavor of the sweet almond, and partly 
because the FDA has limited the sale of bitter almonds (see previous 
footnote), almost all bitter almond trees now have been destroyed. 

2 Letter from Dr. Dean Burk to Mr. M. Standard, op. cit. 


the patient in a much greater concentration in the 
same volume of iryectible material. 

Commenting on the question of possible toxic- 
ty of Laetrile, Dr. Burk has summed it up with this 
emphatic statement: 

With forty-five years of study and re- 
search on the cancer problem, the last - 
thirty-three years in the U.S. National 
Cancer Institute, and with files of virtu- 
ally all published literature on the use of 
amygdalin ("Laetrile") with reference to 
cancer, and with innumerable files of un- 
published documents and letters, I have 
found no statements of demonstrated 
pharmacological harmfulnesg of amygda- 
lin to human beings at any dosages re- 
commended or employed by medical doc- 
tors in the United States and abroad. 1 

Dr. D.M. Greenberg, Professor Emeritus of 
Bio-Chemistry at the University of California at 
Berkeley, and consultant to the Cancer Advisory 
Council of the California Department of Public 
Health added this note of concurrence: 

There is no question that pure amygdalin 
(Laetrile) is a non-toxic compound. This 
is hot questioned by anyone who has 

Letter from Dr. Dean Burk to Stephen Wise and Gregory Stout, 
Attorneys, dated Dec. 17, 1972. 


studied the reports, submitted to the 
Cancer Advispry Council of the State of 
California. 1 , 

In the early days of experimentation with Lae- 
trile, it was feared that the substance might be toxic 
if taken orally. This concern was b^sed on the fact 
that, in the beginning, ways had not yet been per- 
fected to remove the beta glucosidase (unlocking 
enzyme). from the apricot extract and, since Lae- 
trile is a highly-concentrated form of B17, on the 
basis of theory, it was feared that it might pose a 
problem when activated by the secretions of the 
stomach. Consequently, some of the early "written 
works on Laetrile recommended injections only 
and cautioned against taking the substance orally. 
That caution, however, has long outlived its useful- 
ness, and there is now no medical reason what- 
soever to avoid the oral form. , 

Aspirin tablets are twenty times more toxic 
than the equivalent amount of Laetrile. The toxicity 
of aspirin is cumulative and can build up for days 
or even months. The chemical action of B17, how- 
ever, is completed usually within a few hours leav- 
ing behind absolutely no build-up. Each year in the 
United States, oyer ninety people die from aspirin 
poisoning. No one ever has died from Bit. Aspirin 
is a drug, alien to nature and to the body, whereas 
Bit is a vitamin found abundantly in plants that are 
appropriate for human consumption. Laetrile is 
even less toxic than sugar. x 

Statement made on Oct. 13, 1969, as quoted in report attached to lettei 
from Dr. Dean Burk, Ibid. 


In a series of tests on adult mice, Dr. Dean 
Burk reported that they could live in perfect health 
to extreme old age when their normal diet consisted 
of fifty percent defatted apricot kernels. He. said 
that this provided each mouse with a whopping 
one hundred and twenty-five milligrams of vitamin 
B17 per day. And he added that this was "in addi- 
tion, excellent food material, rich in' protein and 
minerals." 1 

In another series of tests, white rats were fed 
seventy times the normal human dose of Laetrile, 
and the only side-effects produced were greater 
appetite, weight gain, and superior health; just what 
one would expect from taking a vitamin. 

better from Dr. Dean 3urk to Congressman Lou Frey, Jr., dated May 
30, 1972. 



The names, professional 

* standings > medical achievements^ 

and clinical findings of some of 

the more prominent doctors who 

endorse Laetrile; the heneffeiul 

side-effects produced by its use; a 

suggested anti<ancer diet; and a 

brief description cf vitamin B 15. 

* * Laetrile is goddamned quackery V ■ 
Such is the pronouncement of Helene Brown, 
president of the American Cancer Society of 
California, 1 

There have been at least twenty-six published 
medical papers written by well-known physidtos 
who have used Laetrile experimentally in the treat- 
ment of their own patients, and who have con- 
cluded that Laetrile is both safe and effective in the 
treatment of cancer, 2 In addition, there are the vo- 
luminous private records of physicians who Save 
used it clinicftfly t>ut have never published their 
findings except in letters to their colleagues or in 

|44 The Pain Exploiters; The Victimizing of Desperate Cancer Pa- 
tients," Todays Health, Nov., 1973, p. 28. 

? A complete list Of these papers is contained in The Laetriles, dp.cit., 
pp. 84, 85. 



public lectures or interviews. The American 
Cancer Society and other spokesmen for orthodox 
medicine would have us believe that only quacks 
and crackpots have endorsed this conclusion. But 
the doctors who conducted these experiments and 
those who share their conclusions are not quacks. 

Here are just a few of the names: 


In West Germany there is Hans Nieper, 
M.D., Director of the Department of Medicine' at 
the Silbersee Hospital in Hanover. He is a pioneer 
in the medical use of cobalt ahd is credited with 
developing the anti-cancer drug, cyclophos- 
phamide. He is the originator pf the concept of 
"electrolyte carriers" in the prevention of cardiac 
necrosis. He was formerly the head of the Aschaf- 
feriburg Hospital Laboratory for chemical circulat- 
ory research. He is listed in Who's Who in World 
Science and is the Director of the German Society 
for Medical Tumor Treatment. He is one of the 
world's most famous and respected ^cancer 

During a visit to the Unite^ States in 1972, 
Dr. Nieper told news reporters: 

After more than twenty years of such 
specialized w0rk, I have found the non- 
toxic Nitrilosides — that is, Laetrile-— 
far superior to any other known cancer 
treatment or preventative. In my opinion 
it is the only existing possibility for the 
ultimate control of cancer. . - - 


In Canada there is N.R. Bouziane, M.D., Di- 
rector of Research Laboratories at St. Jeanne 
cT Arc Hospital in Montreal. He is a member of the 
hospital's tumor board in charge of chemotherapy,. 
He graduated magna cum laude in medicine from 
the University of MontreaL He received also a 
doctorate in science from the University of 
Montreal and St. Joseph's University, an affiliate of 
Oxford University in' New Brunswick, He is a Fel- 
low in chemistry and a Fellow in hematology * and is 
certified in clinical bacteriology, hematoiogy and 
biochemistry from the college. He is Dean of the 
American Association of Bio- Analysts. 

After the first series of tests with Laetrile, 
shortly after it was introduced, Dr. Bouziane re- 
ported: ' 

We always have a diagnosis based on his- 
tology [microscopic analysis of the 
tissue] . We have never undertaken^ case 
without histological proof of cancer . . . . 

In our investigation, some terminal c^sfesi 
were so hopeless that they did not even 
receive what we consider the basic dose 
-- - of thirty grams. Most cases, however,' 
became ambulatory and some have in this > 
short time resumed their normal activities 
on a maintenance dose. 1 .' 

'"The Laetrile Story/* op. cit. p. 3. Also Cancer News Journal, 
JariVApril, 1971, p. 20. 


In the Philippines there is Manuel Navarro, 
M,D>, Professor of Medicine and Surgery-at the 
University of Satito Tojraas in Manila. He is an 
Associate Member of the National Research 
Council of the Philippines^ Fellow of the Philip- 
pine College of Physicians, the Philippine Society 
of Endocrinology and Metabolism; and a member 
of the Philippine Medical Association, the Philip- 
pine Cancer Society* and many other medical 
groups. He is distinguished internationally as a 
cancer researcher and has over one hundred major 
scientific papers to his credit, some of which have 
been read before the International Cancer Con- 
gress. Ift 1971 Dr. Navarro wrote: 

1 ... .have specialized in oncology [the 
study of tumors] for the past eighteen 
years. For the same, number of years I * , 
have been using Laetrile-amygdalinin the 
treatment of my cancer patients^ During 
this eighteen year period I have treated a 
total of over five hundred patients with 
Laetrile-amygdalin by various routes of 
administration, including the oral and the 
I.V. The majority of my patients receiv- 
ing Laetrile-amygdalin have been in a 
terminal state when treatment with this 
material commenced. 

It is my carefully considered clinical 
judgment, as a practicing oncologist and 
researcher in this field, that I have ob* 
tained most significant a$d encouraging 


results with the use of Laetrile-amygdalin 
in the treatment of terirjinal cancer pa- 
tients, and that these results are eompar- 
' able or superior to the results I have ob- 
tained with the use of the more toxic " 
standard cytotoxic agents. 1 

In Mexico there is Ernesto Contreras, M.D., 
who, for over a decade, has operated the Good 
Samaritan Cancer Clinic in Tijuana. He is one of 
Mexico's most distinguished medical figures. He 
received postgraduate training at Harvard's 
Children's Hospital in Boston. He has served as 
Professor of Histology and Pathology at the Mexi- 
can Army Medical School and as the chief 
pathologist at the Army Hospital m Mexico City. 

Dr. Contreras was introduced to Laetrile in 
1963 by a terminal cancer patient from the United 
States who brought it to his attention and urged him 
to treat her with it. The woman rfecovered* and Dr. 
Coiitreras began extensive investigation of its 
properties and use. Since that time he has treated 
thousands of cancer patients, most of whom have 
been American citizens who have been deniecTthe 
freedom to use Laetrile in their own country. 

Dr. Contreras has summarized his experiences 
with vitamin therapy as follows: 

The palliative action [improving the com- 
fort and well-being of fhe patient] is in 

'Letter from Dr. Navarro to Mr. Andrew McNaughton, The 
McNaughton Foundation, dated January 8, 1971, published in the 
Cancer News Journal, Jan./April, 1971, pp. 19, 20., 


about 60% of the case&. Frequently, 
enough to be sigi^fieant, I see arrest of 
the disease or even regression in some 
15% of the very advanced eases. 1 

In Japan theje is Shigeaki Sakaf, a prominent 
physician in Tokyo. In a paper published in the 
October 1963 Asian Medical Journal, Dr. Sakai 

Administered to cancer patients , Laetrile 
has proven to be quite free from any 
harmful side-effects^ and I would say that 
no anticancer drug;^ouldma:ke a cancer- 
ous patent irfiprove fester than Laetrile. 
It goes without saying that Laetrile con- 
trols cancer and is quite effective where- 
ver it is located. / 

In Italy there ia Professor Etore Guidetti, 
M- Dv, of the Uniyersity of Turin Medical SchooK 
Dr. Guidetti spoke befpre the Conference of the 
International Union Against Cancer held in Brazil 
in 1954 and revealed how his use of Laetrile in ter- 
minal cancer patients had caused the destruction of 
a wide variety of tuniors including those of the 
uterus, cervix, reeterri, and breast. A Tti some 
cases, " he said, "one Hj&s been able to observe a 
group of fulminating an^caulifldwer-like neoplastic 
masses resolved very rabidly. " He reported also 

l Cancer News Journal, Jan./Aprih 197 U ...$. 20. Again* we must bear in 
mind that these we terminal patients ^peopte who have been give^n up 
as hopelesisby orthodox medicine. Fifteen percent recovery out of that 
group is a most impressive accomplishment. 


that, after administering Laetrile to patients with 
lung cancer, he had been "able to observe, with the 
aid of radiography, a regression of the neoplasm or 
the metastases^" 

After Guidetti's presentation, an American 
doctor rose in the audience and informed everyone 
present that Laetrile had been thoroughly investi- 
gated in the United States and found to be worth- 
less. Dr. Guidetti replied, "I do not care what was 
determined in the United States. I am merely re- 
porting what I saw in my own clinic.' n 

Iii Belgium there is Professor Joseph H. 
Maisin, Sr., M.D., of the University of Louvain 
where he is Director of the Institute of Cancer. He 
is President Emeritus of the International League 
Against Cancer which conducts the International 
Cancer Congress every four years. 

And in the United States there are such re- 
spected names as Dr. Dean Burk of tho National 
Cancer Institute * the late Dr.. John A. Mofrone of 
the Jersey City Nledical Center, Dr. Ernst T. 
Krebsu-Jr-, who developed Laetrile, Dr. John A. 
Richardson, the courageous San Francisco physi- 
cian who challenged the government's right to pre- 
vent Laetrile from being used in the United States, 
and many more from over twenty countries with 
equally impeccable credentials. 

Most of these researchers have reported inde- 
pendently that patients experience several impor- 
tant side effects. These usually include a nor- 
malizing of Mood pressure in hypertensive patients, 
improved appetite, an increase in tfye hemoglobin 

l Cancer News Journal, Jan./April, 1971, p. 19. 


and red blood cell county the elimination of the fetor 
(which is 'the unpleasant odor often associated with 
terminal cancer patients), and above all, a release 
from paiu without narcotics, Evenif the patient has 
started Laetrile therapy too late to be saved* this 
v last effect is a iserclful blessing initself. 

In addition to the clinical results obtained by 
these physicians 111 tile treatments humans, there 
have been at least five carefully controlled experi- 
ments oh mice that have shown definite Laetrile 
anti-cancer action. These includes (1) The experi- 
ments done by Scirid Laboratories of San Francisco 
in 1968, (2) the studies completed at the Pasteur 
Institute (Paris) la 1911 > (^-Skose at the Institute 
von Ardenne (Dresden, Germany) in 1973, (4) the . 
experiments done by the Southern Research Insti- 
tute in 1973, and (5) the first and third trials at the 
i^an-K^eringlnstitute In 1973 and 1974; And in 
spite of all this, .spokesmen for orthodox medicine 
still proclaim there is ho evidence that Laetrile 
works, The evidence, however, is everywhere* 1 

While the use of Laetrile alone has proven to be 
effeefee In many iiistsiices* la* better results usu- 
ally are obtained with supplemental therapy as well. 
John Richardson, M.p., of San Francisco Jias 
achieved one of the highest mcoveryrates among 
Laetrile practitioners in the entire world. Here* in 
his own words, is the advice he gives to his patients : 

Vegetable Kingdom' In the vegetable 
kingdom qat anything and everything that 

lJtk See How They Lie, See How They Lie," by Dr. D&mBurk, Cancer 
News Journal Vol. 9, no. 3 (June* 1974), p. 5. 


is edible and for which you have no 
idiosyncrasy. Eat everything whole. I^at 
aU of the edible parts of the food — espe? 
ciaHy the roughage. This food is prefera- 
bly eaten raw; but when you cannot toler- 
ate it raw, cook the food just sufficiently 
to make it tolerable or edible. 

Animal Kingdom: Eat any or all fish as 
fresh as possible ahd lightly cookedin the 
absence of animal fats (vegetable oils tmy 
be used). Eat the skin-free meat of poul- 
try. Whatever does not fall within this 
formula, forget it. D6n't eat it. The for- 
mula is all-inclusive so it's not necessary 
to mention: no dairy products, beef, mut- 
ton, pork, bacon, ham, etc" 

""The liver is to neoplastic diseases what 
the heart is to circulatory diseases. The 
liver is central. 

Adequate liquid intake with fresh fruit 
juices plain or carbonated. 

Vitamin Supplements: Vit. C, 150(Jmgto 
5000 mg; 800 - 1 2(^0 International Units of 
d alpha tocopherol (vitamin E) plus a 
good brand of therapeutic multi- vitamins , 
preferably of organic or natural deriva- 

Toxins of all kinds to be avoided includ- 


ing tobacco, alcohol. Discourage coffee, 
tranquilizers, sedatives, analgesics. An- 
tibiotics <MC . 

Rest important while exercise should 
spare the affected area . . . . 

You should include Vitamin Bis (pan- 
gafmic acid) which detoxifies the liver as a. 
transmettayfetmg agent, and increases the 
oxygen uptake potential of the tissues, 
, and since tro|tobtost lives by the fermen- 
tative process, the rational for the Bis is 
obvious, . 

Pancreatic Enzyme Supplementation: 
We find dessicated pancreas substances 
to be an effective supplement. 1 

The dietary restrictions prescribed by Dr. 
Richardson are, of course, for those who have 
cancer and are undergoing Laetrile therapy. It is 1 
not recommended for healthy persons because it is 
unnecessarily restrictive. For those who do not 
have cancer > a general diet containing foods rich in 
nitriloside content steuld be adequate.^ As an 
example, here is whaft Dr* Krebs sieges ts: 

For brealrfast, gruel of buckwheat* mil- 
let, and flaxseed^with elderberry jelly on 
millet toast. All this accompanied by 
stewed prunes. 

r Open letter to interested doctors dated Nov. 1972, revised 1974. 
2 Again we highly recommend Jane de Spain*s^ The Little Cyanide 
Cookbook, (American Media, Thousand Oal&, Calif., 1975). 


For lunch, lima beans or a succotash with 
chick peas; millet rolls with plum jam; 
elderberry wine. 

For dinner, a salad with bean and millet 
sprouts; dinner rolls of buckwheat and 
millet sweetened with sorghum molasses ,< 
extracted from sorghum cane; rabbit 
which, hopefully, fed on clover; and after 
dinner apricot, peach, cherry, or plum 
brandy originally prepared from crushing 
the entire or whole fruit. 

Nibbling on any member of the raspberry 
family, macadamia huts, $rid bamboo 
sprouts is also suggested. 

Dr. Krebs has pointed outjhat in the Old 
Testament there is a formula for' the preparation of 
grains for bread, and it speaks of six ingredients, 
five of which are rich in nitrilosides. They are bar- 
ley, beans, lentils, millet and fitch (chickpea or 
garbanzp beans), 1 

The intended balance of nature does not re- 
quire a vast amount of vitamin B17 in the daily diet 
any more than it is required of the other vitamins. It 
is possible that if one did no more than eat the seeds 
from an apple or two a day he could obtain an 
adequate supply. But that Would probably be bor- 
dering on the low side, especially considering the 
fact that, in westernized society, B17 is not gener- 
ally available in other foods to supplement it. So it 

l EzekieilV,9. 


probably would be advisable to obtain a higher level 
of intake than that* 

Obviously, some of the foods mentioned by 
Dr. Krebs are not always readily available to the 
average city dweller. As a substitute, many people 
simply have adopted the habit of eating six to 
twelve apricot or peach seeds each day, or have 
ground them in their blinders and used them as a 
light seasoning for cere#s, salads, and the like. For 
those who disliked th§ slight bitter taste of these 
seeds, they can be ground up arid loaded into empty 
capsules. Which means that no one need be de- 
prived of this vitamin if they really want it. 

Vitamin Bis has been mentioned several times 
as< an important aiqdUary therapy in addition to 
vitamin Bit, arid therib often is quite a- bit of confu- 
sion between the two. So let's take a moment to 

Vitamin Bis technically is called pangamic 
acid. Pm% implies ^everywhere and garni means 
seed. It was so named because it is found in small 
amounts almost everywhere on earth in seeds and 
usually in the company of other members of the 
vitamin B complex. 

Like Br* it too was discoyered by Dr. E.T. 
Krebs, fe, while ^^(^ing thechemical^ropertie^ 
of apricot kernels in 1 952* It could be said that it was 
an unexpected bonus or by-product of the search 
for vitanrin Bi7. 

The best way to understand the effect of vita- 
min Bis is to think of it as instant oxygen>It in- 
creases the oxygen efficiency of the entire body and 
aids in the detoxification of waste productSwSince 


cancer cells do not thrive in the presence of oxygen 
but depend rather on fermentation of glucose, it is 
probable that B15, indirectly, is an enemy of cancer. 

Vitamin B 15 is not widely known or used in the 
United States. The reason is almost an exact paral- 
lel to the Laetrile story. The government officially 
has refused to recognize that B15 is of value. Mean- 
while it is used extensively in many other countries . 
Russia ifi particular is far ahead of the United States 
in the use of this substance and has conducted ex- 
tensive research into its many uses. In fadt, in 1965 
the U.S.S.R. Academy of Sciences released a 
205-page symposium of its findings up to that date. 
In 196&the Scientific Advfsory Committee of the 
Ministry of Health unanimously ratified all the orig- 
inal claims in the report and authorized the Soviet 
drug industry to begin mass-production of Bis for 
general use. 

It has been reported that the Russian athletes 
have been given heavy doses of B15 during their 
participatidn at the Olympics. If this is true, there is 
good reason for it. Experiments have shown that 
this substance, although just a natural food factor, 
greatly increases physical strength and stamina. 
When rats were put into tubs of water and forced to 
swim, those that had been vitaminized with Bis 
were all still swimming long after the others had 
fatigued and drowned. When other rats were put 
into glass chambers from which oxygen gradually 
was removed, the vitaminized rats lived considera- 
bly longer — thus on less oxygen — than the control 

The Soviet scientists disclosed that vitamin 


B15 is effective in such areas as circulatory prob- 
lems, heart conditions, elevated Wopcf cfadiesterol, 
various skin disoidfrs, hardening of the arteries, 
bronchial asthma, diabetes mellitus, and wound 
healing. They were especially emphatic in their 
findings that Bis was- elective in retarding the age- 
ing process! Professor Shpirt of the City Clinical 
Hospital No. 60 in Moscow concluded: "I believe 
the time will come when there will be calcium^pan- 
gamate (B*s) next to the salt shaker on the table of 
every family with people past forty." 1 

Doctors, such as John Richardson, who wish 
to use vitaMnBifr in Americav have been forced to 
operate on the fringe of the law because their gov- 
ernment has harassed its manufacturers and 
blocked its movement in commerce. As Dr. Krebs 

*. Our concern is with vitamin Bis — a 
natural constituent of natural foods, one 
that experimentatioh has shown to be of 
definite value in increasing^resistafice to 
disease and in mailrtaining healthy func- 
tioning of the body as well; 

Pangamic acid is giving the people r of 

Russia, Japan, Yugoslavia, France, 

r Spain, and Germany a tremendous health 

*For a detailed analysis of these findings, see Vitamin Bis (Pangamic 
Acid); Properties, Functions* and Use, (Science publishing House, 
Moscow, U.S.S.R., 1965) reprinted by McNaughtbn Foundation, 
Sausalito, Calif. 


and longevity advantage. But it is not 
available to us in the land in which it was 
first discovered. 

Fortunately, there is some evidence that Bis is 
finatty becoming recognized by several of the more 
prestigious medical institutions in spite of govern- 
ment obstacles. Let us hope that the trend rapidly 

It is possible that Bis will be recognized and 
accepted by orthodox medicine long before B17. 
This is because there is less, vested interest to over- 
come. There have been no broad derogatory pro- 
nouncements by the AMA and, hence, no reputa- 
tions are at stake. But, in time, the sheer weight of 
the facts will force the acceptance of B17 as well. 
And the mpn who now bear the brunt of con- 
troversy, professional ostracism, and social scorn, 
will emerge, not as quacks, but as the great medical 
pioneers of their day. 



Clinical evidence in support of 

' the trophoblastic Jhesis; 

laboratory experiments showing 

that Laetrile kills cancer cells; 

and case histories of a variety of 

terminal cancer patients who 

attribute their recovery to the 

effect of Laetrile . 

The cyanide scare mentioned previously was 
but one small salvo in the continuing barrage of 
officialdom's attacks against Laetrile. The total 
weaponry runs the gamut from scare tactics, to out- 
right falsehoods. But mostly they take the form of 
scholarly pronouncements, cloaked in the cloth of 
apparent concern for the public welfare, that vita- 
min therapy may sound good in theory, but in prac- 
tice, it simply does not work. 

Dr. Ralph Weilerstein, Public Health Medical 
Officer of the California Food and Drug Adminis- 
tration has said flatly: "Nobody's come up with any 
reliable data that it is of any value." 1 The Federal 

1Ci Food Additive Ban Likely/' San Jose Mercury (Calif.), Sept. 9; 



FDA has proclaimed: "The Food and Drug Ad- 
ministration has seen no competent, scientific evi- 
dence that Laetrile is effective for the treatment of 
^cancer." 1 And the American Cancer Society, in an 
impressive volume entitled Unproven Methods of 
Cancer Management, has stated: 

After careful study of the literature and 
other information, available to it, the 
American Cancer Society does not have 
evidence that treatment with Laetrile .re- 
sults in objective benefit in the treatment * 
of cancer in human beings. 2 

Commenting bn this particular statement, Dr. 
Dean- Bur k of the National Cancer Institute de- 
scribed it as: 

... a statement with close to zero 
scientific worth, however much sheer 
v propaganda value. The fact is . . . there 
are few "proven" methods operating on a 
large scale anywhere, so that the word 
"unproved," as used by the ACS, is a 
highly and unjustifiedly weighted 
word." 3 

As far as the general public is concerned, how- 

l A Cancer Journal for Clinicians (published by ACS) July/ Aug., 1972. 

Published 1971, p. 139, / 

3 Letter from Dr. Dean Burk to Dr. Frank Rauscher, Director of the 

National Cancer Institute, dated April 20, 1973. 


ever, if the American Cancer Society classifies vita- 
min B17 or Laetrile as an "unproven cancer cure," 
that's all they need to know. Consequently, official 
pronouncements from prestigious organizations 
such as these are hard to ignore. But so are the 
favorable findings of those clinicians who have used 
Laetrile on their own patients. Somebody is wrong! 

In a previous chapter we examined in detail the 
scientific integrity of the one research project upon 
which almost all official opposition to Laetrile is 
based, and we discovered that it is shockingly lack- . 
ing on all counts. We discovered, also, that almost 
all of the cancer "experts" who have spoken out 
against Laetrile have done so, not out of personal 
experience or experimentation, but simply out of 
their complete faith in the scientific integrity of this 
one discredited report. In other words they have 
been quoting still other experts who, in turn, have 
been quoting the "findings" of two men. And we 
learned that these two men not only had never used 
Laetrile themselves but actually had falsified the 
records of what was reported to them by members 
of the research team. 

Showing that the case against Laetrile is 
fraudulent, however^ does not constitute a case for 
Laetrile. It is necessary, therefore, first to examine 
at least some of the overwhelming evidence that 
vitamin Bi 7 actually does work in practice just as 
well as it does in theory. 

The effectiveness of the trophoblastic thesis as 
a basis of cancer therapy has been demonstrated 
both in the laboratory and in the clinic beyond any 


doubt. In 1935, for example, long before the de- 
velopment of Laetrile, Dr. Isabella Perry of the 
Department of Pathology at the University of 
California Medical School conducted a series of 
experiments in which she subjected tuqior-bearing 
rats to prolonged inhalation of cyanide fumes. Here 
is what she wfote: 

s A considerable percentage of the animals 
so treated showed complete regression of 
the tumor. Both regressmg and growing 
tumors in treated animals had little capac- 
ity for transplantation. 1 

Perry observed that these experiments were 
probably of little value to humans because, in order 
to be effective, the level of cyanide fumes had^to be 
dangerously close to lethal — a problem that is not 
present when the cyanide is released only at the 
cancer cell, as it is in the action of vitamin B17. 
Nevertheless, these rats showed, not only com- 
plete tumor regression, but, compared to the con- 
trol group without cyanide, an average lifer exten- 
sion in excess of three hundred percent. 

When we turn to the laboratory reports on 
Laetrile, the results, are even more encouraging, 
especially since there is none of the danger con- 
nected with the inhalation of cyanide fumes. Dr. 
Dean Burk- Director of the Cytochemistry Section 
of the federal government's National Cancer Insti- 

144 The Effects of Prolonged Cyanide Treatment on The Body and 
Tumor Growth in Rats ," American Journal of Cancer, 1935, 25:592. 


tute, has reported that, in a series of tests on animal ^ 
tissue, the B17 had no harmful effect on normal 
cells, but released so much cyanide and benzal- 
dehyde when it came in contact with cancer cells 
that not one of them could survive. He said, "When 
we add Laetrile to a cancer culture under the mi- 
croscope, providing the enzyme glucosidase also is 
present, we can see the cancer cells dying off like 
flies/' 1 

While participating in the Seventh Interna- 
tional Congress of Chemotherapy held in Prague in 
1971, Dr. Burk declared: 

Laetrile appears to work against many 
forms of cancer including lung cancer. 
And it is absolutely non-toxic . ... 

In vitro tests, with Ehrlich ascites car- 
cinoma [a particular type of cancer 
culture] revealed that, where cyanide 
alone killed one percent of the cells and 
benzaldehyde alone killed twenty per- 
cent, a combination of the two was effec- 
tive against all the cells. Amygdalin 
[Laetrile] with glucosidase [the "unlock- 
ing enzyme"] added also succeeded in 
killing 100 percent of the ascites tumor 
cells, due to the freeing of the same two 
chemicals. 2 

'"Laetrile Ban May Be Lifted," Twin Circle, June 16, 1972, p. 1 1. 
2 "Amygdalin Claimed Nontoxic Anti-Cancer Therapeutic Agent, 
Infections Diseases, Oct. 15, 1971, pp. 1, 23. 



In another series of tests, Dr. Burk reported 
that Laetrile was responsible for prolonging the life 
of cancerous rats eighty percent longer than those 
irr the central group not so innoculatedU 1 

The than who made these findings is one of the 
foremost cancer specialists in the world. In 1965 he 
received the Gerhard Domagk Award for Cancer 
Research, and in 1952 and 1955, the Hillebrand 
Award of the American Chemical Society, and 
most recently the Commander Knighthood Of The 
Medical Order of Bethlehem (Rome) founded in 
1459 by Pope Pius the Eleventh. He holds a Ph.D. 
in biochemistry earned at the Uiiiversity of Califor- 
nia. He was a Fellow of the National Research 
Council at the University of London, Kaiser 
Wilhelm Institute for Biology, and also at Harvard. 
He was senior chemist at the National Cancer Insti- 
tute, which he played a role in establishing, and 
since 1946 has been director of the Cytochemistry 
Section. He belongs to eleven scientific organiza- 
tions, has written three books relating to 
chemotherapy research in cancer, and is author or 
co-author of more than two hundred scientific pa- 
pers in the field of cell chemistry. 

If Dr. Burk says Laetrile works, it works! 

Dr. Burk, of course, is not a physician. He is a 
biochemist. His experiments have been with cancer 
cultures and with laboratory animals, not people. 

testimony in Hearings before the Subcommittee on Public Health 
and Environment, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, 
House of Representatives, Ninety-Second Congress, as quoted in 
Cancer, News Journal, July-October, 1972, p. 48. 


As we have seen, however, the health records of 
the Hunzakuts, and Eskimos, and many other 
groups around the world are statistically conclusive 
that vitamin B17 does control cancer in human be- 
ings with an effectiveness approaching 100%. 
There can be little controversy over that. But what 
about cancer once it already has started? Can B17 
restore a person to health after he has contracted 
the disease? \ 

, The answer is yes, (fit is caught in time, and if 
the patient is not too badly damaged by prior X-ray 
treatment or toxic drugs. Unfortunately, most 
cancer victims start taking Laetrile only after their 
disease is so far advanced that they have been given 
up as hopeless by routine medical channels. Usu- 
ally they have been told that they have only a few 
more months or weeks to live. And it is in this tragic 
state of near death that they tufh to vitamin therapy 
as a last resort. If they die — and, indeed, many of 
them do — then they are counted as statistical fail-, 
ures for Laetrile. In reality, it is a victory for Lae- 
trile that any of them should be saved at this stage. 
For once a deficiency disease has progressed so far, 
the damage it does simply cannot be reversed. 

It is known, for example, that a severe vitamin 
A deficiency in a pregnant animal will result in an 
offspring that is completely blind. In fact, it will be 
born without orbits, retina, or even optical nerves. 
No amount of vitamin A administered at that late 
stage can-cause the eyes to grow back. 

Likewise,^ child whose legs become bowed by 
rickets (a vitamin D deficiency disease) can never 


achieve a normal bone structure again ho matter 
how much vitamin D he receives. 

In cancer, of course, the process is somewhat 
different. Instead of normal tissue failing to form or 
becoming ma/formed., it literally becomes de- 
stroyed. The cancerous growth invades and cor- 
rupts, leaving behind organs that cannot function 
simply because they are almost completely gone. 

A man who has been shot with a gun can have 
the bullet removed but still die from the wound. 
Likewfse, a patient can — and often does — have 
his, cancer destroyed by vitamin B17 and still die 
from the irreversible! damage already done to his 
vital organs. 

And so, in view of this tremendous handicap, 
the number of terminal patients who have been 
restored to health is most impressive. In fact there 
literally are thousands of such case historiesin the 
medical record. The American Cancer Society has 
tried to create the impression that the only ones 
who claim to have been saved by Laetrile are those 
who merely are hypochondriacs and who never 
really had cancer in the first place. But the record 
reveals quite a different story; Let's take a look at 
just a few examples. 

Mr. David Edmunds of Pinole, California, was 
operated on in June of 1971 for cancer of the colon, 
which also had metastasized or spread to the blad- 
der. When the surgeon opened him up, he found 
that the malignant tissue was so widespread it was 
almost impossible to remove it all. The olockage of 


the intestines was relieved by severing the colon 
and bringing the open end to the outside of his 
abdomen — a procedure known as a colostomy. 
Five months later, the cancer had worsened, and 
Mr. Edmunds was told that he had only a few more 
months to live. 

Mrs. Edmunds, who is a Registered Nurse, 
had heard about Laetrile and decided to give it a try. 
Six months later, instead of lying oh his deathbed, 
Mr. Edmunds surprised the doctors by feeling well 
enough to resume an almost normal routine. 

An exploratory cystoscopy of the bladder re- 
vealed that the cancer there had completely disap- 
peared. At his own insistence, he was re-admitted 
to the hospital to ^ee if his colon could be put back 
together again. 

In surgery, they found nothing even resem- 
bling cancer tissue. So they re-connected the colon 
and sent him home to recuperate. It was the first 
, time in the history of the hospital that a reverse 
colostomy of this type had been performed. 

Mr. Edmunds now is living a normal life of 
health and vigor. 1 

In 1967 in Walnut Creek, California, Mrs. 
Joanne Wilkinson, mother of six, had a tumor re- 
moved from her left leg just below the thigh. Four 
months later there was a recurrence requiring addi- 
tional surgery and the removal of muscle and bone. 

*See "Cancer 'Miracle-Cure' " by Mark Trantwein, Berkeley Daily 
Gazette, July 27, 1972. Story confirmed in tape-recorded personal 
interview by author. 


A year later, a painful lump in the groin appeared 
and began to drain. A biopsy revealed that her 
cancer had returned and was spreading. 

Her doctor told her that surgery would be 
necessary again, but this time they would have to 
amputate the leg, the hip, and probably the bladder 
and one of the kidneys as well. The plan was to open 
up her lungs first to see if cancer had located there. 
If it had, then they would not amputate, because 
there would be no, chance of saving her anyway. 

At the urging of her sister and of a mutual 
friend, Mrs. Wilkinson decided not to undergo 
surgery but to try Laetrile instead. Her doctor was 
greatly upset by this and told her that, if she did not 
have the surgery, she couldn't possibly live longer 
than twelve weeks. Mrs. Wilkinson describes in her 
own words what happened next: 

That was Saturday, November 16> 1968. 
I'll never forget that day! The stitches 
from the biopsy were still in the leg. 

Dr. Krebs 1 gave me an injection of Lae- 
trile — and the tumor reacted. It got very 
large — from walnut size to th.6 size of a 
small lemon — and there was bleeding 
four or five days. I went back on Monday, 
Wednesday, and Friday each week for 
five weeks to get injections, and the - 

^he is referring here to Byron Krebs, M.D., the brother of Dr. E.T. 
Krebs, Jr. 


tumor then started getting smaller. Five 
weeks later I could no longer feel it. 

An X-ray was taken'the first Monday, 
and regularly after that to watch the prog- 
ress. Injections were continued for six 
months — ten cc's three times a week —* 
and of course the diet: No dairy products, 
nothing made with white flour — no eggs 
— but white fish, chicken, turkey. 

And I felt wonderful! In fact, in August, 
1 969, the doctor told me I needed no more 
injections. My X-rays were clear, show-* 
ing that the tumor had shrunk, was appar- 
ently encased in scar tissue, fond was not 

Today, years after her doctor told her she couldn't 
possibly live longer than twelve weeks without 
surgery, Mrs. Wilkinson is living a healthy and 
productive life. All that is left as a grim reminder of 
her narrow escape is a small scar from the biopsy. * 
Mr! Joe Botelho of San Pablo, California, un- 
derwent surgery (trans-urethral subresection) and 
was told by his doctor tliat he had a prostate tumor 
that simply had tacome out. His reaction? 

I didn't let them take it out because I 
figured that would only spread it. The 

*See "Laetrile — An Answer to Cancer?" Prevention, Dec. 1971, pp. 
172-175. Story confirmed in personal interview by author. 

156 . ," WORLD-WITffOUT CANCER: Part One 

doctor told me I wouldn't last too long. 
He wanted to give me -cobalt, and I 
, wouldn't agree to that either. 

At a health food store I heard about a 
doctor in San Francisco who used Lae- 
trile. I went to see him, was told that the 
prostate was the size of a bar of soap, I 
"""" got one injection every four days for sev- 
eral months, from January 1969 for. a 
year. 1 

Mr. Botelho, who was sixty-five at the time, 
also maintained a strict diet designed specifically 
not to use up the body's pancreatic enzyme, tryp- 
sin. He fs no longer afflicted with his tumor and 
even reports th&t his hair is turning dark again. He's 
not sure what has caused that, but attributes it to his 
better eating habits. 

Alicia Buttons, the wife of the famous actor- 
comedian Red Buttons, is among the thousands of 
Americans who attribute their lives to the action of 
Laetrile. Speaking before a cancer convention in 
Los Angeles, Red Buttons declared: 

Laetrile saved Alicia from cancer: Doc- 
tors here in the U.S. gave her only a few 
months to live last November. But now 
she is alive and well, a beautiful and vital 

'Laetrile — An Answer to Cancer?" op ciL, pp. 175. 176." 


wife and mother, thanks to God and to 
those wonderful men who have the cour- 
age to stand up for their science. 1 y 

Mrs. Buttons had been suffering from ad- 
vanced cancer of the throat and was given up as 
terminal by practitioners of orthodox medicine. As 
a last resort, however, she went to West Germany 
to seek Laetrile therapy from Dr. Hans Nieper of 
the Silbersee Hospital in Hanover. Within a few 
months her cancer had completely regressed, the 
pain had gone, her appetite had returned, and she 
was as healthy and strong as ever before. Doctors 
in the United States verified the amazing recovery, 
but could not believe that a mere vitamin substance 
had been responsible. 

The reluctance of many physicians to accept 
the reality of the vitamin concept of cancer ^as well 
described by Miss Carol Vencius, a former cancer 
victim from Marin County, California. After suc- 
cessful Laetrile treatment in Tijuana, Mexico, 
under the care of Dr. Ernesto Contreras, Miss 
Vencius returned home. Here is what she reported: 

I went to another doctor who had treated 
me. He greeted me with ".Well, what do 
they do down there? Do you crush the 
apricot pit, bathe in it? Do they light in- 
cense over you?" 

^'Comedian Red Buttons Says 'Laetrile Saved My Wife From Death 
By Cancer,' " The National Tattler, Aug. 19, 1973, p. 5. ' 


\ said to him, "Okay, enough with the 
jokes , " " and asked him to read the College 
of Marin Times article [which contained 
information about Laetrile]. He said his 
mind was closed on the matter. When I 
pressed, he finally said, "Carol, I guess 
you might be "able to help me after all. 
You see, I have insomnia and I'm sure 
that if I read^that article it would put me to 
sleep." 1 

Miss Vencius' story, unfortunately, is not u- 
nique. Several years ago, she began to complain of 
feeling generally ill: night sweats, itching, fever, 
and headaches. After extensive tests in the hospital 
she was told that she had Hodgkin's Disease (a 
form ofcancer initially affecting the lymph nodes), 
Miss Vencius continued: 

Only a couple of days after that, a friend 
came to visit and told me about vitamin 
therapy in Mexico called Laetrile. I never 
• followed up on his advice, I was too 
frightened. And besides, at the time I had 
complete faith in my doctors .... 

The first thing they tried was cobalt radia- 
tion treatments. Soon after they began, 

|4t Laetrile Works Through C.O.M. Times," College of Marin Times, 
April 12, 1972. 


my doctor told me," Carol , of course you 
know this treatment will make you 
sterile," Hell no, I didn't kfiow. Natur- 
atlly I became pretty upset .... I went 
through menopause at the age of 28. 

Other "side effects" were indescribable pain, 
loss of appetite, and temporary loss of hair. Six 
months after the treatments, her lungs and heart 
cavity began to fill with fluid. They tried draining it 
with a hypodermic, but it continued to fill up. She 
was having minor heart attacks. 

After six weeks and three heart taps, her 
physicians were still debating whether or not to 
remove the pericardium (the membrane enclosing 
the heart cavity). On November 28, 1970, it was 

By July, general fatigue, sleeplessness, and 
loss of appetite had returned and for several months 
. grew worse until it was decided to try drugs. 

The first injection left me with mild 
nausea. Two weeks later, I received two 
more injections which produced acute 
nausea and diarrhea followed by & week 
of intense pain in my jaw > It was so bad I. 
couldn't eat. This was followed by a 
. one- week migraine headache, followed 
/ by stomach cramps, followed by leg 
cramps.Jn all, the symptoms lasted four 


For ten days following this, however, I 
felt great, better than I had in years, This 
positive response, I was told, was a sign 
that the disease was still active and that 
the drugs had done some good. Then it 
was downhill agairi, a return of pain, , 

sleeplessness, fatigue, and all the rest. I 
decided then, whatever happened, I 
would not undergo chemotherapy again. 

At this point, Miss Vencius concluded that it 
was hopeless anyway so there was no reason why 
she should not go to Mexico and try Laetrile after 
all. Dr. Contreras told her that Hodgkins Disease 
was slower to respond to vitamin therapy than 
many other cancers such as those of the lung,- 
pancreas, liver, or colon, but that it certaiiJTy was 
worth a try. After just the third day on Laetrile, 
however, she reported that her pain had gone com- 
pletely and that within only a week she^was feeling 
almost entirely normal again. She since has recov- 
ered her health and continues on a routine mainte- 
nance dose of vitamin B17. 

-- The issue of maintenance doses is important. 
Once a person has contracted cancer and recov- 
ered, apparently his need for vitamin B47 is con- 
siderabljrgreater than for those whohave not. Most 
physicians who have used Laetrile in cancer 
therapy have learned through experience that their 
patients, once recovered, can reduce their dosage 
levels of Laetrile, but if they eliminate it altogether, 


it is almost a certain invitation to a return of the 
cancer. It's for this reason that physicians using 
Laetrile never say that it cures cancer. They prefer 
the more accurate word control, implying a continu- 
ing process. 

This fact was illustrated most dramatically and 
tragically in the case of Mrs, Margaret De Grio, 
wife of a County Supervisor in Sierra County, 
California. After undergoing surgery twice, and 
with her cancer continuing to spread, she was told 
by three physicians that her casewas hopeless and 
that there was nothing further that modern medical 
science could dq. But Mike De Grio had read a 
book about Laetrile and decided, to take his wife to 
Mexico for treatment. It was the same old story: 
she bega : n to improve immediately and, after four 
months of intensive treatment, she returned to her 
Northern California home with only minor symp- 
toms of her original cancer. The rapid disappear- 
ance of her tumors was confirmed by her American 
doctor, although he could not explain why it hap- 

Shortly afterward, however, Mrs. De Grio 
contracted a serious respiratory- infection and was 
hospitalized in San Francisco for pneumonia. 
While she was there for over three weeks,- her 
physician and the hospital staff refused to allow her 
the maintenance dose of Laetrile because they 
feared it might be against the California anti- 
quackery law. The denial of this dose came at a 
critical time in the recovery and healing stage. Mrs; 


De Grio died on the night Of October 17, 1963, not 
\from pneumonia, but of cancer. 1 

In 1972, Dr. Dale Dannei> a podiatrist from 
Santa Paula. California, developed a pain in the 
right leg and a severe cough. X-rays revealed a 
carcinoma of both lungs and what appeared to be 
massive secondary tumors iff the leg. The cancer 
was inoperable and resistant to radio therapy. The 
prognosis was: incurable and fatal. 

At the insistence of his mother, Dr. Danner; 
agreed to try Laetrile, although he had no faith in its 
effectiveness, primarily just to please her, he ob- 
tained a large supply in Mexico. But he was con- 
vinced from what he had read in medical journals 
that it was nothing but quackery and a fraud. 
Perhaps it was even dangerous, he thought, for he 
noticed from the literature that it contained large 
amounts of cyanide. 

Within a few weeks the^pain and the coughing 
had progressed to the point where no amount of 
medication could hold it back. Forced to crawl on 
his hands and knees, and unable to sleep for three 
days and nights, he became despondent and des- 
perate. Groggy from the lack of sleep, from the 
drugs, and from the pain, filially he turned to his 
supply of Laetrile. 

14 'The Laetrile Story," by Jim Dean and Frank Martinez, The Santa 
Ana Register, Sept., 1964. For an excellent portrayal of the futility and 
tragedy of orthodox cancer therapy, read See the Patients Pie, by 
Wynn Westover (Science Press International), Sausalito, Calif., 1974). 


Giving himself one more massive dose of 
medication, hopefully to bring on sleep, he then 
proceeded to administer the Laetrile directly into 
an artery. Before losing consciousness from the 
medication, Dr. Danner had succeeded in taking at 
least an entire ten-day supply — and possibly as 
high as a twenty-day supply — all at once. 

When he awoke thirty-six hours later, much to 
his amazement, not only was he still alive, but also 
the cough and pain were greatly reduced. His appe- 
tite had returned, and he was feeling better than he 
had in months, Reluctantly he had to admit that 
Laetrile was working. So he obtained an additional 
supply ajmd began routine treatment with smaller 

doses. Three months later he was back at work. 1 


The use of vitamin B17 in the treatment of 
cancer is not new. The earliest recorded case was 
published in 1845 in the Paris Medical Gazette. 2 - A 
young cancer patient was given 46,000 milligrams of 
amygdalin over a period ofseveral months in 1842 
and, reportedly, was still living at the time of the 
article three years later. A woman with extensive 
cancer throughout her body received varying 
amounts of amygdalin starting in 1834 (!) and was 
still surviving at the time of the report eleven years 

From the publication of this first report up until 
the present, there have been literally thousands of 

1 Story confirmed in tape recorded interview by author. ^ 
2 Gazette Medical de Paris, vol. 13, pp. 577-582. 


similar case histories reported and documented. It 
is important to know this because, as demonstrated 
previously, official spokesmen for orthodox 
medicine have stated authoritatively that there 
simply is no evidence that Laetrile works. The truth 
is that the evidence is everywhere. ^ 

When confronted with this evidence, some 
doctors, because of their professional bias against 
nutritional medicine, seek alternate explanations. 
Their favorite is that the cancer had a delayed re- 
sponse to previous treatment such as radiation or 
drugs. And when it occasionally occurs that there 
has been no previous treatment except Laetrile, 
they say then that the patient probably didn't have 
cancer in the first place. And when it is demon- 
strated that the presence of cancer was proven by 
surgery or biopsy, then they fall back on the claim 
that it was ^spontaneous remission, meaning that it 
just went away on its own with no outside help. 

It is true, of course, that, occasionally, there 
are cases in which cancers either stop spreading or 
disappear without medical treatment. 1 But such 
cases, statistically, are extremely rare. With certain 
cancer locations — -such as testicular 
chorionefJithelioma, for instance — they are so rare 
as to defy statistical analysis. And when one comes 
up with a series of such cases, all of which have 

1 It would be extremely interesting to examine such cases for a possible 
change in eating habits to seeif there were any connection between the 
two. My guess is that such a study would show a change in foods, either 
by selection or by a change in locale, that placed less of a demand upon 
the pancreas and/or provided a higher source of natural vitamin Bit. 


involved proven cancers, and all of which have 
responded to B17, it is beyond reason to speak of 
spontaneous regressions. 

In a banquet speech in San Francisco on 
November 10, 1967, Dr. Ernst T. Krebs, Jr., briefly 
reviewed six such cases. Then he added: 

/ Now there is an advantage in not having 
had prior radiation, because if you have 
not received prior radiation that has 
failed, then you cannot enjoy the im- 
agined benefits of the delayed effects of 
prior radiation. So this boy falls into the 
category of the "spontaneous 
regression . . . ." 

And when we look at this scientifically, 
we know that spontaneous regression oc- 
curs in fewer than one in 1 50,000 cases of 
cancer. The statistical possibility of spon- 
taneous regression accounting for the 
complete resolution of six successive 
cases of testicular chorionepithelioma is 
far greater than the improbability of the 
sun not rising tomorrow morning. 1 

With the passage of each year and the presence 
of a growing stream of patients who are living proof 

'Speech delivered before a meeting of the International Association of 
Cancer Victims and Friends at the Jack Tar Hotel, Nov. 19, 1967- 


of their clainv it becomes increasingly difficult to 
ignore or dismiss these recovferies. If they are 
spontaneous remissions, then, indeed, it must be 
said in all fairness that Laetrile produces far more 
spontaneous remissions than all other forms of 
therapy put together! 

Returning to the question 'of ^'proven" vs. 
"unproven" cancer cures, Drl Dean Burk has said: 

It's foolish ever to talk about a cure in 
cancer . . . but when you dompare the 
reports on Laetrile, they stack lip very 
well with the conventional methods", re- 
gardless of what you might hear other- 
wise — suclxas from the California Board 
of Health. They simply are not telling the 

You know how administrative organiza- 
tions do have power. When you have 
power you don't have to tell the truth. 
That's a rule that'-s been working in this 
world for generations. And there ^ire a 
great many people who don't tell the truth 
when they are in power in administrative 

For instance, the California State Board 
of Health published many times that 

'UNPROVEN" CANCER CURES 167 worthless. Well, now, there is 
no scientific basis for that that I have ever 
seen. It . . . is just not true. 1 

^Interview on the Owen Spahn Talk Show, San Francisco, June 28, 



The effects of surgery and 

radiation on prolonging the life of 

the cancer patient; a comparison 

showing that those who receive no 

treatment at all live just as long, 

if not longer, than those who 

are treated. 

The advocates of Laetrile therapy have always 
gone out of their way to emphasize that there is no 
cure, as such, for cancer. Since it is essentially a 
deficiency disease, one can only speak of preven- 
tion or control but not cure. Among the advocates\ 
of orthodox therapies, however, there is no such 
restraint. Official spokesmen for the medical pro- 
fession repeatedly tell the American public, with- 
out batting an eyelash, that they have prove n cures 
for cancer, and that anyone who resorts to such 
nostrums as Laetrile is merely wasting valuable 
time in which he would be far better off ^availing 
himself of these proven cures. What are these 
cures? They are surgery, radiation, and drugs. 

The following news report carried in a Los 
Angeles paper is typical: 



Warnings of a mounting scale of cancer 
quaekery activity affecting the San Fer- 
nando Valley were issued today by the 
American Cancer Society. 

Mrs. Stanley Grushesky, Education 
Chairman of the Society's Valley area, 
said she is concerned over the possibility 
that some local residents have been de- 
ceived in recent weeks by propaganda 
issued pn behalf of unorthodox prac- 
titioners with claims of unproven cancer 
"cures." ... \ 

She declared that "under the banners of 
freedom of speech, with the slogan of 
freedom of choice, advocates of unor- 
thodox cancer remedies have been mak- 
ing wild claims which could easily lure 
unsuspecting victims into a quackery 
mill." ... 

Mrs. Grushesky. said that surgery and 
radiation are the only known methods for 
successfully treating cancer, although 
some beneficial effects have been 
obtained in certain cases through 
the administration of chemicals or 
hormones. . . . 

"Cancer quackery kills many unsuspect- 
^ ing patients because; time wasted on 



phony devices and treatments delays ef- 
. fective treatment until it is too late to save 
thepatient's life." 1 

' Echoing the same theme, Dr. Ralph Weiler- 
stein of the California Department of Public Health 

The use of Laetrile in early cancer cases 
to the exclusion of conventional treat- 
ment might well be dangerous since 
treatment with acceptable, modern cura- 
tive methods — surgery or radiation- 
— would thereby be delayed potentially 
until such time as metastases had occur- 
*~ red and the cancer, therefore, might no . 
longer be curable. 2 ' 

Public Library reference volumes on canper 
often contain bookmarks printed and distributed by 
the American Cancer Society. One of these depicts 
an ace of spades on the front along with the slogan: 
BET YOUR LIFE ON IT. On the back it says: 
"For more information oil proven cancer cures, 
write or phone the American Cancer Society." 

In response to this bookmark, a letter was sent 
to the headquarters expressing surprise at the asser- 

14 *Amer. Cancer Soc. Warns of Valley Quacks," The Valley News 

(Van Nuys, Calif.), Dec. 10, 1972. 

2 As quoted in College of Marin Times (Kentfield, Calif), April 26^ 



tion about there being any cancer therapy success- 
ful enough to warrant being calledia proven cure., 
Thisas the reply received: 

To Mr. G. Edward Griffin: 

Thank you for your note. There are . 
proven cures if detected in time — surgery 
and/or .radiation and, more and more, 
chemotherapy is playing its part. 1 /, , 

This, then, is the position of orthodox 
medicine. For comparison, therefore, let us take a 
look at the results and benefits of the so-called cures 
obtained through surgery, radiation,- and 

As we shall see, surgery is the least harmful of 
the three. In all fairness it must be said that, in some 
cases, it can be a life-saving stop-gap measure 
— particularly whereintestinal blockages and adhe- 
sions must be relieved in order to prevent the pa- 
tient from dying from secondary complications. 
Surgery also has the psychological advantage of 
visibly removing the tumor. And, from that point of 
view, it offers the patient and his family some tem- 
porary comfort and hope. However, the degree to 
which surgery is useful is the same degree to which 
the tumor is not malignant. The greater the propor- 
tion of cancer cells in that tumor, the less likely it is 
that surgery will help. And the most highly malig- 

! Letter from Mabel Burnett dated Dec. 18. 1972. 


nant tumors of all generally are considered inopera- 

A further complication of surgery is the fact 
that any cutting into the tumor— even a biopsy 
— does at le^st two things that logically should ag- 
gravate the condition. First, it causes physical 
trauma to the area. This triggers off the healing 
process which, in turn, brings more trophoblast 
cells into being as a by-product of that process. (See 
Chapter IV.) The other effect is that, if not all the 
malignant tissue is removed, what remains tends to 
be encased in scar tissue from the surgery. Scar 
tissue tends to act as a barrier between the cancer 
cell and the rest of the body. Consequently, the 
cancer tends to become insulated from the action of 
the pancreatic enzymes which, as we have seen, are 
so essential in exposing trophoblast cells to the 
surveillant action of the white blood cells. 

Perhaps the greatest indictment of all against 
surgery is the gnawing suspicion among even many 
of the world's top sujrgeons that, statistically, there 
is no solid evidence that patients who submit to 
surgery have any greater life expectancy, on the 
average, than those who do not. This is an area 
which desperately needs intensive and unbiased 
study. / 

The first statistical analysis of this question 
was compiled in 1844 by Dr. Leroy d'Etoilles and 
published by the French Academy of Science. It is, 
to date, the most extensive study of its kind ever 
released. Over a period of thirty years, case his- 
tories of 2,781 patients were submitted by 174 


physicians. The average survival after surgery was 
only one year and five months — not much different 
than the average today. ^ 

Dr. Leroy d'Etoilles separated his statistics 
according to whether the patient submitted to 
surgery or caustics, or refused such treatment. His 
findings were electric: 

The net value of surgery or caustics was ' 
in prolonging life two months for men and 
six months for women. But that was only 
in the first few years after the initial diag- 
nosis. After that period, those who had 
not accepted treatment had the greater 
survival potential by about fifty percent. i 

1844, of course, was a long time ago. But recent 
surveys invariably have produced nearly the same 
results. For instance, it long has been accepted 
practice for patients with breast cancer to have not 
only the tumor removed but the entire breast and 
the lymph nodes as well. In more recent years, the 
procedure often includes removal of the ovaries 
also on the theory that cancer is stimulated by their 
hormones. Finally, in 1961, a large-scale controlled 
test was begun, called the National Surgical Adju- 
vant Breast Project. After seven-and-a-half years of 
statistical analysis, the results were conclusive: 
There was no significant difference between the 
percentage of patients remaining alive whp had re- 

^alshe, Walter H., The Anatomy, Physiology, Pathology and 
Treatment of Cancer, (Ticknor & Co., Boston, 1844). 


ceived the smaller operation and those who had 
received the larger. l 

One of the most distinguished statisticians in 
the medical field is Hardin B. Jones, Ph.D., profes- 
sor of medical physics and physiology at the Uni- 
versity of California at Berkeley. After^years of 
searching published and unpublished clinical rec- 
ords, he appeared at an American Gancer Society 
convention and reported bluntly: 

In regard to surgery, no relationship be- 
tween intensity of surgical treatment and 
duration of survival has been found in. 
verified malignancies. On the contrary, 
simple excision of cancers has produced 
essentially thfe same survival as radical 
excision and dissection of the lymphatic 
drainage. 2 ' y 

All of this, of course, related dnly to surgery of 
the breast. Turning his attention to surgery in gen- 
eral* Dr. Jones repo&ed: 

Although there is a dearth of untreated 
cases for statistical comparison with the 
treated, it is surprising that the death risks 

^avdin, R.G.,, "Results of a Clinical Trial Concerning The 
Worth of Prophylactic Oophorectomy for Breast Carcinoma/* 
Surgery, Gynecology & Obstetrics, 131:1055, Dec, 1970. Also see 
"Breast Cancer Excision Less with Selection/' Medical Tribune, Oct. 
6, 1971, p. 1. 

2 A Report on Cancer," paper delivered to the ACS's 11th Annual 
Science Writers Conference, New Orleans, Mar. 7, 1969. 


of- the two groups remain so similar. In 
the comparisons it has been assumed that 
the treated and untreated eases are inde- 
pendent o£ each other. In fact, that as- 
sumption is incorrect. Initially, all cases 
ire untreated. With the passage of time, 
some receive treatment, and the likeli- 
hood of treatment increases with the 
length of time since origin of the disease. 
Thus , those cases in which the neoplastic 
process progresses slowly [and thus au- 
tomatically favorfc a long-term survival] 
are more likely to become "treated" 
cases. For the same reason, however, 
those individuals, are likely to enjoy 
longer survival, whether treated or not. 
Life tables truly representative of un- 
treated cancer patients must be adjusted 
for the fact that the inherently longer- 
lived cases are; more likely to be trans- 
ferred to the "treated" category than to 
.remain in the "untreated until death." 

The apparent life expectancy of un- 
treated eases of cancer after such ad- 
justment in the table seems to be greater 
than that of the treated cases. [Emphasis 
. added] 

What, then, & the statistical chance for long- 
term survival of five years or more after surgery? 
That, we are told, depends on the location of the 


cancer, how fast it is growing, and whether or not it 
has spread to a secondary point in the b6dy. For x 
instance, two of the most common forms of cancer 
requiring surgery are of the breast ar>d the lung. I n 
the case of breast cancer, only sixteen percent will 
respond Irp any way to either surgery or X-^ray 
therapy. In the case of lung cancer, the per9entage 
of patients who will survive five years after surgery 
is somewhere between five and ten percent. 1 And 
these are optimistic figures when compared to sur- 
vival expectations for some other types of cancers 
such as testicular chorionepitheliomas. 

When we turn to cancers which have metas- 
tasized to secondary locations within the body, 
then the picture virtually is hppeless — surgery or no 
surgery. As one cancer specialist summarized it 
bluiitly: * '•■. 

A patient who has clinically detectable 
distant metastases when first seen has 
' virtually a hopeless prognosis, as do pa- 
tients who wpre apparently free of distant 
metastases at that time but who subse- 
quently return with distant metastases. 2 

*See "Results of Treatment of Carcinoma of the Breast Based on 
Pathological Staging," by F.R£. Johnstone, M.D., Surgery, 
Gynecology & Obstetrics; 134*211, 1972. Also "Consultant's Com- 
ment," by George-Crile, Jr., M.D.^ Calif. Medical Digest vAug. J972, 
p. 839. Alsb" Project. ^dms at Better Lung Cancer Survival,*' Medical 
Tribune, Oct. 20, 1971. Also statement by Dr. Lewis A. Leone, 
Director of the Department of Oncology-at JUjode Island Hospital in 
Providence, as quoted in "Cancer Controls Still Unsuccessful,"^.^; 
Herald Examiner, June 6, 1972, p. C-12. 
2 Johnstone v op. cit. ^ 


An objective appraisal, therefore, is that the 
statistical rate of long-term survival after surgery is, 
on the average at best, only ten or fifteen percent. 
And once the cancer has metastasized to a second 
location; surgery has almost no survival value 
whatsoever. The reason, of cpurse, is that, like the 
other therapies approved by orthodox medicine, 
surgery removes only the tumor. It does not re- 
move the cause. 

The rationale behind X-ray therapy essentially . 
is the same as with surgery. The medical objective 
is to remove the tumqr r but to do so by burning it 
away rather than cutting it out. Here, also, it is 
primarily the non-cancer cell that is destroyed. The 
more malignant the tumor, the more resistant it is to 
radio therajpy. This should be ovbious, for if it were 
the other way around, then X-ray therapy would 
have a high degree of success-^which, of course, it 
does not. 

If the average tumor is composed of both 
cancer and non-cancef cells , and if radiation is more 
destructive to non-cancer cells than to cancer cells, 
then it would be logical to expect the results^to be a 
reduction of tumor size, but also an increase in the 
percentage of malignancy. This is, in fact, exactly 
what happens. 

Commenting on this mechanism, Dr. John 
Richardson, has explained it this way: 

Radiation and/or radiomimetic poisons 

■- will reduce palpable, gross or measurable 

tumefaction. Often this reduction may 


amount to seventy-five percent or more 
of the mass of the growth; These agents 
have a selective effect — radiation and 
poisons. They selectively kill everything . 
except the definitively neoplastic 
[cancer] cells. 

For example, a benign uterine myoma 
Will usually melt away under radiation 
like snow in the sun. If there be neoplastic 
cells in such tumor, these will remain. 
The size of the tumor may thus be de- 
creased by ninety percent while the rela- 
tive concentration of definitively neo- 
plastic cells is thereby increased by 
ninety, percent. 

As all experienced clinicians know — or at 
Iea$t should know — after radiation or 
poisons have reducedihe gross tumefac- 
tion of the lesion the patient's general 
well-being does* not substantially im- 
prove. To the contrary', there is often an 
explosive or fulminating increase in the 
biological malignancy of his lesion. T^is 
is marked by the appearance of diffuse 
metastasis and a rapid deterioration in 
general vitality followed shortly by 
death. 1 

1 Open letter to interested doctors, Nov., 1972. 


And so we see that X-ray therapy is cursed 
with all the same limitations and drawbacks of 
surgery. But it also has one more: it actually in- 
creases the likelihood that cancer will dey^elop in 
other parts of the body! ^ 

Yes, it is a well-established fact that excessive 
exposure to radioactivity is an effective way to 
induce cancer. This was first demonstrated -by ob- 
serving the increased cancer incidence .among the 
survivors of Hiroshima, but it has been corrobo- 
rated by many independent studies since then. For 
example, a recent headline in a national circulation 
newspaper tells us/ FIND 'ALARMING' 
AGO. 1 

The Textbook of Medical Surgical Nursing, a 
standard reference volume for Registered Nurses, 
is most emphatic on this point. It says: 

This is an area of public health concern 
because it may involve large numbers of 
people who may be exposed to low levels 
of radiation over; a long period of time. 
The classic example is of the women em- 
ployed in the early 1920's to paint-watch 
arid plock dials with luininizmg (radium- 
containing) paints. Years later, bone sar- 
comas resulted from the carcinogenic ef- 
fect of the radium. Similarly, leukemia 
occurs more frequently in radiologists 

l The National Enquirer, Oct. 7, 1973, p. 29. 


than other physicians. Another example 
is the Hiroshima survivors who have 
shown the effects of low levels of 
radiation. ... 

Among the most serious of the late con- 
sequences of irradiation damage is the 
increased susceptibility to malignant 
metaplasia and the development of 
cancer at sites of earlier irradiation. Evi- 
dence cited in support of this relationship 
refers to the increased incidence of car- 
cinoma of skin, bone, and lung after latent 
periods of 20 years and longer following 
irradiation of those sites. Further support 
has been adduced from the relatively high 
incidence of cajrcinoma of the thyroid 7 
, years and longer following low-dosage ir- 
radiation of the thymus in childhood, and 
from the increased incidence of leukemia 
following total body irradiation at any 
age. 1 

In 1971, a research team at the University of 
Buffalo, under the direction of Dr. Robert W. Gib- 
son, reported that less than a dozen routine medical 
X-rays to the same part of the body increases the 
risk of leukemia in males byat least sixty percent. 2 
Other scientists have become increasingly con- 

HJ.B. Lippincott Co., Philadelphia, Pa., 1970) 2nd Edition, p. 193. 
2 "Tdo Many X-Rays Increase Risk of Leukemia, Study Indicates," 
National Enquirer, Dec. 5, 1971, p. 11. 


cerned about the growing American infatuation 
with X-rays and have urged a stop to the madness, 
even calling for an encfto the mobile chest X-ray 
units for the detection of TB. 1 And these " routine" 
X-rays are harmlessly mild compared to the fantas- 
tically intense radiation beamed into the bodies of 
cancer patients, today. 

X-rays induce cancer because of at least two 
factors. First, th$y do physical damage to the body 
which triggers off the production of trophoblast 
cells as part of the healing process. Second, they 
weaken or destroy the production of white blood 
cells which, as we have seen, constitute the im- 
munological defense mechanism, the body's front- 
line defense against cancer. 

Now to the question of statistics. Again we 
find that, on the average, there is little or no solid 
evidence that radiation actually improves the 
patient's chances for survival. The National Surgi- 
cal Adjuvant Breast Project, previously mentioned 
in connection with surgery, also conducted studies 
on the effect of irradiation, and here is a summary of 
their findings: • 

From the data available it would seem 
that the use of post-operative irradiation 
has provided # no discernible advantage to 
patients so treated in terms of increasing 


,k Top FDA Officials Warn: Chest X-Rays in Mobile Vans Are 
Dangerous and Must Be Stopped," National Enquirer, Sept. 10, 1972, 
P. 8. ! 


the proportion who were! free of disease 
for as Jong as five years. 1 

This is an embarrassingly difficult fact for a 
radiologist to face, for it means, quite literally, that 
there is little real justification f&r his existence in the 
medical fraternity. If he were to admit publicly 
what he knows privately from experience, a guy 
could talk himself right out of a job! Consequently, 
one does not expect to hear these facts being dis- 
cussed by radiologists or those whose livelihood 
depends on the construction, sale, installation, use, 
or maintenance of the itfulti-million dollar linear 
accelerators. It comes as a pleasant surprise, there- 
fore, to hear these truths spoken frankly and openly 
by three well known radiologists sharing the same 
platform at the same medical convention. They 
were William Powers, M.D., Director of the Divi- 
sion of Radiation Therapy at the Washington Uni- 
versity School of Medicine, Phillip Rubin, M.D., 
Chief of the Division of Radiotherapy at the Uni- 
versity of Rochester Medical School, and Vera 
Peters, M.D., of the Princess Margaret Hospital in 
Toronto, Canada. Dr. Powers stated: 

Although preoperative and postoperative 
radiation therapy have been used exten- 
sively and for decades, it is still not possi- 
ble to prove unequivocal clinical benefit 

'Fisher, B., et.aL. "Postoperative Radiotherapy in the Treatment of 
Breas^ Cancer; Results of the NSAPP Clinical Trial;" Annals of 
Surgery, 172, No. 4, Oct. 1970. 


from this combihed treatment. . . . Even 
, if the rate of cure does improve with a 
combination of radiation and therapy, it is 
necessary to establish the cost in in- 
creased morbidity which may occur in 
patients without favorable response to 
the additional therapy. 1 

Dr. Rubin's statement was even more to the 
point. After reviewing the statistics of survival pre- 
viously published in the Journal of the American 
Medical Association, he concluded: 

The clinical evidence and statistical data 
in numerous reviews are cited to illustrate 
that no increase in 'survival has been 
achieved by the addition of irradiation. 

To which Dr. Peters added: 

In carcinoma of the breast, the mortality 
rate still parallels the incidence rate, thus 
proving that there has been no true im- 
provement in the successful treatment of 
the disease over the past thirty years, 
even though there has been technical im- 
provement in both surgery and 
radiotherapy during that time, 

144 Preoperative and Postoperative Radiation Therapy for Cancer,*' 
speech delivered to the Sixth National Cancer Conference, sponsored 
by the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute, 
-Denver, Colorado, Sept. 18-20, 1968. 


In spite of the almost universal fcxperience of 
physicians to the contrary, the American Cancer 
Society still prattles to the public that their statistics 
show a higher recovery rate for treated patients as 
compared to untreated patients. After all, if this 
were not the case, why on earth would anyone 
spena the motley or undergo the pain and disfig- 
urement associated with these orthodox treat- 
ments? But how can they get away with such out- 
right lies? 

The answer is that they are not really lying 
—just bending the truth a little. In-other words, they 
merely adjust the method of gathering and evaluat- 
ing statistics so as to guarantee the desired results. 
In the words of Dr. Hardin Jones: 

Evaluation of the clinical response of 
cancer to treatment by surgery and radia- 
tion, separately or in combination, leads 
to the following findings: 

The evidence for greater survival of 
treated groups in ^6 mparison with/ un- 
treated is biased by the method of defin- 
ing the groups. All reported studies pick 
up cases at the time of origin of the dis- 
ease and follow them to death or end of 
the study interval. If persons in the un- 
treated or central group die at any time in 
the study interval, they are reported as 
deaths in the control group . I n the treated 
group, however, deaths which occur be- 


fore completion of the treatment are re- 
jected from the data, since these patients 
do not then meet the criteria established 
by definition of the term fc 'treated . * ' The 
longer it takes for completion of the 
treatment, as in multiple step therapy, for 
example ? the worse the error. . .- ., 

With this effect stripped out, the common 
malignancies show a remarkably similar 
rate of demise, whether treated or 
untreated. 1 

But there is far more to it than that. Such statis- 
tical error is significant^ but it is doujbtful if it could 
account for the American Cancer Society's favorite 
claim that "there are on record a million and a half 
people cured of cancer through the efforts of the 
medical profession and the American Cancer Soci- 
ety , with the help of the FDA." 2 

The answer lies in the fact that there are some 
forms of cancer, such as skin cancer, that respond 
-.very well to treatment. kj fact, often they ^re ar- 
rested or disappear even without treatment. Sel- 
dom are they fataL But they affect large numbers of 
people — enough to change the statistical tabula- 
tions drastically. In the beginning, skin cancers 
were not included in the national tabulations be- 

*"A Report on Cancer/Vtfp.c/f. 

2 Letter from Mrs. Glenn E. Baker, Executive Director, Southern 
District, ACS, addressed to Mr. TJG. Kent, reprinted inCancer News 
Journal, Jan./Feb., 1972, p. 22. 


cause of these considerations plus the fact that, in 
those days, very few people sought medical treat- 
ment for their skin disorders, preferring to treat 
themwith home remedies, many of which, inciden- 
tally seem to have worked just as well as some of the 
more scientifically acceptable techniques today. 

At any rate, as doctors became more plentiful, 
as people became more affluent and able to seek out 
professional medical help, and as the old-time rem- 
edies increasingly fell into disrepute or oblivion, 
the number of reported skin cancers gradually in- 
creased until it is now listed by the ACS as a "major 
site." So, all they had to do to produce most of 
those million-and-a-half "cures," was to change 
their statistics to include skin cancers— presto- 

As Dr. Hardin Jones revealed: 

Beginning in 1 940, through redefinition of 
terms, various questionable grades of 
malignancy were classed as x cancer. After 
that date, the proportion of "cancer" 
cures having "normal" life expectancy 
increased rapidly, corresponding to the 
fraction of questionable diagnosis 
included. 1 

When X-ray therapy is used, the body's white 
blood cell count is reduced which, in turn, leaves 

l "A Report on Cancer,'" op.cit. 



the patient far more susceptible to infections and 
other diseases as well. It is common for such pa- 
tients to succumb to "pneumonia, for instance, 
rather than cancer. And that is what appears on the 
death certificate — as well as in the statistics. As Dr. 
Richardson has observed: 

I have seen patients who have been 
paralyzed by cobalt spine radiation, and 
after vitamin treatment their HCG t£st is 
faintly positive. We got their cancer, but 
the radiogenic tfianipiilation is such that 
they can't walk. ... 

It's the cobalt that will kill, not the 

If the patient is strong enough or lucky enough 
to survive the radiation, then he still faces a closed 
door. As with all forms of currently popular treat- 
ments, once the cancer has metastasized to a sec-, 
ond location, there is practically no chance that the 
patient -will live. So, in addition to an almost zero 
survival value, radio therapy has the extra distinc- 
tion of also spreading the very cancer it is supposed" 
to combat. '' . . _ 

It is commonly believed— because it is com- 
mqnly heard— that early diagnosis and early treat- 
ment greatly increases the chance of survival. This, - 
in fact, does not appear to be so" at least when 

1 Letter from John Richardson, M.D;, to G. Edward Griffin, dated 
Dec. 2, 1972. 

' 'PRO VEN' ' CA NCER C URES 1 89 

applied to the orthodox therapies r. It is-tnxe that the 
American Cancer Society claims to have statistics 
to support this claim, but the higher "cure" rate 
apparently is caused by a heavy weighting in favor 
of the slow-growing easy-to-control caftcers, such 
as skin cancer, and does not become true of the 
more serious tumors affecting the reproductive or 
vital organs. As Dr. Hardin Jones stated emphati- 

In the matter of duration of malignant 
tumors before treatment, no studies have - 
established the much talked about rela- 
tionship between early detection and 
favorable survival after treatment. . . . 
Serious attempts to relate prompt treat- 
ment with chance of cure have been un- 
successful. In some types of cancer, the 
opposite of the expected association of- 
short duration of symptoms with a high 
chance of being "cured" has been ob- 
served. A long duration of symptoms be- 
fore, treatment in a few cancers of the 
breast and cervix is associated with 
longer than usual survival. . . . Neither 
the timing nor the extent of treatment of 
the true malignancies has appreciably al- 
tered the average course of the disease. 
The possibility exists that treatment 
* makds the average situation worse. 1 

'"A Report on Cancer," op.cit. 


Or, putting it even more succinctly, Dr. Irwin 
H. Krakoff, of the Sloan- Kettering Institute for 
Cancer Research, says simply:- 

We are concerned with a disease for 
which there is no really satisfactory 
treatment. 1 .^ 

Ii% view of all this, it is exasperating to find 
spokesmen for orthodox medicine continually 
warning the public against using Laetrile on the 
grounds that, supposedly, that will prevent the 
cancer patient from benefiting from "proven" 
cures. The pronouncement by Dr. Ralph Weiler- 
stein of the California Department of Public Health 
cited at the opening of this chapter is typical. But 
Dr. Weilerstein is vulnerable on two points. First of 
all, it is extremely rare to find any patient seeking 
Laetrile therapy who hasn't already been subjected 
to the so-called "modern curative methods'' of 
surgery and radiation. In fact, most of them have 
been pronounced-hopeless after these methods to- 
tally have failed, and it is only |hen that these people 
turn to vitamin therapy as a last resort. So Dr. 
Weilerstein has set up a straw-man objection oh 
that score. But, far more important than that is the 
fact that the Weilersteinian treatments simply do 
not work. 

Battling as a lone warrior within the enemy 
stronghold, Dr. Dean Burk of the National Cancer 

Speech delivered before the American Society of Clinical Oncology in 


Institute repeatedly has laid it on the line. In a 
letter to his boss, Dr. Frank Rauscher, he said: 

In spite of the foregoing evidence, . . . 
officials of the American Cancer Society' 
and even of the National Cancer Insti- 
tute, have continued to set forth to the 
, public that about one in every four cancer 

/ cases is now "cured" or "controlled," 
but seldom if ever packed up. -with the 
requisite statistical or epidemiological 
support for such a statement to be scien- 
tifically meaningful, however effective for 
fund gathering. Such a statement is highly 
y misleading, since it hides the fact that, 
with systemic or metastatic cancers, the 

.'"' actual rate of control in terms of the con- 
ventional five-year survival is Scarcely ♦ 
more than one in twenty 

One may well ask Dr. Weilerstein where 
are all the modern curative methods to 
which he, the California Cancer Advi- 
sory Council, and indeed so many ad- 
ministrators so'glibly refer? . . .No, dis- 
seminated cancer, in its various forms 
and kinds remains, by and large, as "in- 
curable" as at the time of the Kefauver 
Amendment ten years ago — Dr. 
Weilerstein or no Dr. Weilerstein, FDA 
or no FDA, ACS or no ACS, AMAor n6 
AMA, NCI or no NCI. 1 

/Letter to Congressman Frey, op. cit. 


- The statistics of the ACS are fascinating to 
study. They constitute page after page of detailed 
tables and complex charts felling about percentages 
of cancer by location, sex, age, and geography. But 
when it comes to hard statistics about tfieir so- 
called "proven cures," there is nothing. The only 
"statistic" qne can get Is their unsupported state- 
ment: "One out of three patients is being sayed 
today as against one out of five a generation ago." 
Now^ this may or may not be true, depending on 
one's definition of terms. But even if we do not 
challenge it, we must keep in mind that there also is 
a correspondingly larger gain in the number of 
those' who are getting cancer. How come? 
Here is the official explanation: 

Major factors are the increasing age and 
size of the population. Science has con- 
quered many diseases, and the average 
life span of Americans has been extended 
to nearly seventy years. Logger life 
brings man to the age in which cancer, 
most often strikes — froirithe fifth decade 

All of which sounds very plausible ^- until oite 
compiarefe it to the facts: 

First of all, the growth in population has abso- 
lutely nothing to; do with it. The statistics of "one 
out of three" and "one out of fiye" ar§ proportional 
rather than numerical. They represent ratios that 

l Ibid. t p. 20. 


apply universally, regardless of the population size. 
They cannot explain the increasing cancer rate. 

Second, in spite of the fact that life expectancy 
has increased slightly, nevertheless, the average 
age of the population in the last generation has 
increased only from 26.5 years in 1930 to 27.2 years 
in 1969. This could not possibly account for the 
drastic increase of the cancer death rate within that 

Third, increasing age need not be a factor, 
anyway — as the caiicer-free Hunzakuts and Ab- 
khasians prove quite conclusively. 

And fourth, the cancer rate ^mong the very 
young is now rapidly climbing, even faster than 
among the very old. 

It is clear that the American Cancer Society — 
or at least someone very high within it — is.trying to 
give the American people a good old-fashioned 
.snow job. The truth of the matter is — ACS statis- 
tics notwithstanding — that orthodox medicine 
simply does not have "proven cancer cures," and 
what it does have is pitifully inadequate considering 
the prestige itenjoys, the money it collects, and the 
snobbish scorn it heaps upon those who do not wish 
to subscribe to its treatments. 





O rthodox anticancer drugs 

shown to be ineffective and 

cancer-causing; FDA-approved 

experiments on humans resulting 

in death from drugs rather than 

from cancer. 

The following news article appeared in the Los 
Angeles Times on August 18, 1973, under the head- 

Los Angeles (UPI) — The manufacturers 
x ,and distributors of the drug Laetrile were 
called "purveyors of deceit and outright 
quackery" Wednesday by the president 
of the California division of the American 
Cancer Society. 

Helene Brown . . . said the FDA has , 
tested Laetrile at regular intervals, ob- 
r tained negative results, and prohibited its 
use as a cancer remedy. 



Cancer quackery is "a new dimension of 
murder," according to Mrs. Brown who 
said . . . there are now 10 kinds of cancer 
which can bs cured or controlled by 
chemotherapy — the treatment of disease 
by drugs- 

Less than a month later, while speaking at an 
ACS national conference on cancer nursing, Mrs. 
Brown said flatly; ''Present medical knowledge 
makes it possible to cure seventy percent of all 
cancers, if they are detected early." (I) 1 

Leaders of the American Cancer Society ap- 
parently never tire of perpetuating the myth, of 
"proven cures." But they never look quite so 
foolish in the eyes of those who know anything 
about actual survival statistics as they do when they 
speak of cures by chemotherapy. 

We briefly have viewed the miserable results 
obtained by orthodox surgery and radiation. The 
record of so-called anti-cancer drugs, however, is 
even worse . The primary reasonfof this is that most 
of them currently in use are highly poisonous, not 
just to cancer but to the rest of the body as well. In 
fact, generally they are more deadly to healthy tis- 
sue than they are to the malignant cell. 

.AH substances, of course, can be toxic if taken 
in sufficient quantity. This is true of aspirin, sugar, 
Laetrile, or even water. But, unlike these, the anti- 
Cancer drugs are poisonous, not as a result of an 

'"Cancer Quacks Deadly," (AP) The Clarion Ledger, (Miss.), Sept. 
13, 1973. 


overdose, or as a s/de-effect, "but as a primary 
effect. In other words, their poisonous nature is not 
tolerated merely as a necessary price to pay in order 
to achieve some desired effect, it is the desired 

In theory, these chemicals are selected be- 
cause they are capable of differentiating between 
types of cells and* consequently, of poisoning some 
types more than others. But don't jump to the con- 
clusion that they differentiate between cancer and 
non-cancer cells, killing only thfe cancer cells, be- 
cause they do not. 

The cellular poisons used m -orthodox cancer 
therapy today cannot distinguish between cancer 
and non-cancer cells . They act instead to differen- 
tiate between cells that are fast-growing and those 
that are Slow-growing or not growing at all. Cells 
that are actively dividing are the targets. Conse- 
quently , they kill, not only the cancer cells that are 
dividing, but also a multitude of normal cells all 
over the body that also are caught in the- act of 
dividing. ■ * 

In the cake of those cancers that are dividing 
more rapidly than normal cells, theoretically, they 
will be killed before the patient is, btit it is nip and 
tuck all the way. In the case of a cancer that is 
dividing at the same rate or even slower than normal 
cells, then there isn*t even a theoretical chance of 

In either event, the poisoning of the system is 
the whole objective of these drugs, and the resulting 
pain and illness often is a torment worse than the 


disease itself. The toxins catch the blood cells in the 
act of dividing and cause blood poisoning. The 
gastrointestinal system is thrown into* convulsion 
usually causing violent nausea, diarrhea, loss of 
appetite, cramps, and progressive weakness. Hair 
cells are fast-growing, so usually the hair falls out 
during treatment Reproductive organs are affected 
causing sterility. The brain becomes fatigued. 
Eyesight and hearing is impaired. In fact, every 
conceivable function is disrupted with such agony 
for the patient that maiiy of them elect to die of the 
cancer rather thaaio continue treatment. , 

Most of the "aeceptecj" drugs are described as 
radiomimeiic , which means ,they mimic or produce 
the same effect as radiation. Consequently, they 
also suppress the immunological defense 
mechanism and, thus, help to spread the cancer to 
other areas. But whereas X-rays usually are di- 
rected to only one or two locations, these chemicals 
do their deadly workon every cell in the entire body . 
As Dr. John Richardson, has pointed out: 

Both radiation therapy and attempts to 
"poison out" result in a profound hostal 
immunosuppression that greatly in- 
creases the susceptibility to metastasis. 
How irrational it would be to attempt to 
treat cancer immunologically and/or 
physiologically, and at the same time ad- 
minister immunosuppressants in the form 
of radiation of atfy kind, methotrexate, 
5-FU, Cytoxin, or similarly useless and 


dangerous general cellular poisons. All of 
these modalities, as we know, have been 
used to depress the rejection phenomena 
associated with organ transplantation. 
The entire physiological objective in ra- 
tional cancer therapy is to increase the 
rejection phenomena. 1 

The view that toxic " anti-cancer' ' drugs usu- 
ally accomplish just-the opposite of their intent is 
not restricted to the advocates of Laetrile. It is a 
fact of life (or shall we say death?) that is becoming 
widely acknowledged even by those who use these 
drugs. Dr. John Trelford, for instance, of the De- 
partment of Obstetrics afid Gynecology at Ohio 
State University Hospital has said: 

At the present time, chemotherapy of 
gynecological tuntors does not appear to 
have increased life expectancy except in 
sporadic cases. . . .The problem of blind 
chemotherapy means not only a loss of 
the effect of the drugs, butalso a lowering 
of the patient's resistance to the cancer 
cells owing to the toxicity of these agents. 
[Emphasis added.] 2 , 

Nor is Dr. Trelford alone in his observation. A 

^pen letter to interested doctors, Nov.^ J 972. 

2tt A Discussion of the Results Of Chemotherapy on Gynecological 
Cancer and the Host's Immune Response/' Sixth National Cancer 
Conference proceedings, op. cit. 


report from the Southern Research Institute, dated 
April 13, 1972, based upon recent research con- 
ducted for the National Cancer Institute, indicated 
that all of the currently accepted drugs in the 
American! Cancer Society's "proven cure" cate-. 
gory produced cancer in laboratory animals that 
previously had been healthy I 1 

In a courageous letter to Dr. Frank Rauscher, 
his boss at the National Cancer Institute, Dr. Dean 
Burk condemned the Institute's policy of continu- 
ing to endorse these dings when everyone knew that 
they caused cancer. He argued: 

Ironically, virtually all of the 
chemdtherapeutic anti-eaneer agents 
now approved by the Food and Drug 
Administration for use or testing in 
human cancer 'patients are (1) highly or 
variously toxic at applied dosages; (2) 
markedly immunosuppressive, that is , de- 
structive of the patient's native resistance 
to a variety of diseases, including cancer; 
and (3) usually highly carcinogenic 
[cancer-causing J. . . . These now well- 
established facts have been reported in 
numerous publications from the National 
Cancer Institute itself, as well as from 
throughout the United States and r in- 
deed, the world. Furthermore, what has 
' just been said of the FDA-approved 

^CI research contract PH-43-68-9M. Information contained in letter 
from NCI's Dr. Dean Burk to Congressman Lou Frey, Jr., dated May 
30, 1972. 


anti-cancer chemotherapeutic drugs is 
true, though perhaps less conspicuously, 
• of radiological and surgical treatments of 
human cancer. ... 

" / ' 

In your answer to my discussion oft 
March 19, you readily acknowledged that 
the FDA-approved anti- cancer drugs 
were indeed toxic, immunosuppressive, 
and carcinogenic, as indicated. But then, 
even in the face of the evidence, including 
your own White House state ment of May 
5, 1972, all pointing to the pitifully small 
effectiveness of such drugs, you went on 
to say quite paradoxically it seems to me , 
"I think the Cancer Chemotherapy pro- 
gram is one of the best program compo- 
nents that the NCI has ever had." 
. : .One may ask* parenthetically, surely 
this does not speak well of the "other 
program areas?". . . : 

Frankly, I fail to follow you here. I sub- 
mit that a program and series of the 
FDA-approved compounds that yield 
only 5-10% "effectiveness" can scarcely 
be described as "excellent, *' th§ more. so 
since it represents the total production of 
a thirty-year effort o^ the part of all of us 
in the cancer therapy field. 1 

^Letter dated April 20, 1973, op.cit. 


It is not surprising that, after chemotherapy, 
the statistical evidence for long-term survival is 
totally lacking. Here is just a sampling of the nega- 
tive verdict handed down reluctantly but honestly 
by those physicians who, by the way, still continue 
to prescribe it: 

Dr. B. Fisher; writing in the September 1968 
issue ofArinals of Surgery, stated: 

As a result of its severe toxicity and its 
lack of therapeutic effect, further use of 
5-FU as an adjuvant to breast surgery in 
the regimen employed is unwarranted. 1 

_ D;r . Saul A . Rosenberg, Associate Professor of 
Medicine and Radiology at Stanford University 
School of Medicine: 

Worthwhile palliation is achieved in 
many patients. However, there will be 
the inevitable relapse of the malignant 
lymphoma, and, either because of drug 
resistance or drug intolerance, the dis- 
ease will recur, requiring modifications of 
the- chemotherapy program and eventu- 
ally failure to control the disease 
proces$: 2 „ - * 

^'Surgical Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Cancer of the Breast: Results of 
"A Decade of Cooperative Investigation/'^ /maZse/SH/g^ry. 168, No. 
3, Sept., 1968. 

2 "The Indications for Chemotherapy in the Lymphomas/* Sixth Na- 
tional Cancer Conference proceedings, op. eit. 


Dr. Charles Moertal of the Mayo Clinic: 

Our mo$t effective regimens are fraught 
with risks and side-effects and practical 
problems; and after this price is paid by 
all the patients we have treated, only a 
small fraction are rewarded with a tran- 
sient period of usually incomplete tumor . 
regressions. ... 

Our accepted and traditional curative ef- 
forts, therefore, yield a failure rate qf x 
85%. . . .Some patients with gastrointes- 
tinal cancer can have very long survival 
with no treatment whatsoever. 
[Emphasis added.] 1 

Dr. Robert D. Sullivan,' Department of 
Cancer Research at the Lahey Clinic Foundation: 

There has been an enormous undertak- 
ing of cancer research to develop anti- 
cancer drugs for use in the management 
df neoplastic diseases in man. However, 
progress has been slow, and no chemi- 
cal agents capable of inducing a general 
curative effect on disseminated forms of 
cancer have yet been developed. 2 

> Speech made at the National Cancer Institute Clinical Center Au- 
ditorium, May 18, 1972. 

24 * Ambulatory Arterial Infusion in the Treatment of Primary and Sec- 
ondary Skin Cancer,** Sixth National Cancer Conference proceed- 
ings, op.cit. v v 


If it is.tnie thai orthodox chemotherapy is ( 1) 
toxic, (2) immunosuppressant, (3) carcinogenic, 
and (4) futile, then why on earth would doctors 
continue to use it? The answer is that they simply 
don't knpw what else to do. Patients usually are not 
scheduled into chemotherapy unless their condition 
seems so hopeless that the loss pf life appears to be 
inevitaMeanyway. Some doctors refer to this stage, 
not as therapy, but experimentation, which, 
frankly, is a' more honest description. 

Another reason for using drugs in the treat- 
ment of Qancer is that the doctor does not Hke to tell , 
the patient there is no hope. In his own mind he 
kijows there is none, but he also knows that the 
patient does not want to hear that and will seek out 
another physician who will continue some kind of 
treatment, no matter how useless. So he solves the 
problem by continuing the treatment himself. 

Dr. Victor Richards, in his book The Wayward 
Cell,, Cancer, 1 made it very clear that 
chemotherapy today is used primarily just to keep 
the patient returning for treatment and to build his 
morale while he dies. But there is inore! He said: 

Nevertheless, chemotherapy serves an 
- extremely valuable rple in keeping pa- 
tients oriented to wardvproper medical 
therapy, and prevents the feeling of being 
abandoned by the physicians in patients 
with late and hopeless qancers. 

'The University, of Calif. Press, 1972. 


Judicious employment and screening of 
potentially useful drugs may also prevent 
the spread of cancer quackery. 
[Emphasis added.] 

Heaven forbid that anyone should forsake 
the nauseating, pain-racking, cancer-spreading, 
admittedly ineffective "proven- cure s*\ for such 
"quackery" as Laetrile! , ♦ 

Here, at last, is revealed the true goal of 
much of the so-called " educational' ' programs of 
orthodox medicine — psychologically to condi- 
tion people not to try any other forms of therapy. 
That is why they perpetuate the myth of "proven 

The American Cancer Society, in its 
Unproven Methods of Cancer Management, 
stated quite frankly: 

When one realizes that 1 ,500,000 Ameri- 
cans are alive today becaiise they went to 
their doctors in time, and that the proven 
treatments of radiation and surgery are 
responsible for these cures, he is less 
likely to take a chance with a questiona- 
ble practitioner or an unproven 
treatment, 1 

Before leaving the subject of cancer therapy 
and moving on to the field of cancer research, let 

l Op. cif,, pp. 17, 18. 


us clarify and summarize our findings so far. Here is 
a brief outline of the four optional modes of cancer 

SURGERY: Least harmful: Sometimes 
a life-saving, stop-gap measure. No evi- 
• , dence that patients who receive radical or 
extensive surgical options live any longer 
than those who receive the most conserv- 
ative options, or, for that matter, those 
Who receive none at all; Believed by some 
to increase, likelihood of disseminating 
the cancer to other locations. 

When dealing with internal tumors affect- 
ing reproductive or vital orgahs, N the 
statistical rkte of long-term survival is, on 
the average, 10-15%. £fter metastasis, 
the statistical chances for long-term sur- 
vival &re close to zero. 

RADIOLOGY: Very harmful in many 
ways. Spreads the cancer and weakens 

~ the patient's resistance to other diseases . 
Serious and painful side-effects. No evi- 
dence' that treated patients live any 
longer, on the average* than those not 
treated. Statistical rate G>f Jong-term sur- 

r vival after metastasis is close to zero. """ 

CHEMOTHERAPY: Also spreads the 
cancer through weakening ofimmunolog- 
ical defense mechanisiri plus general 


toxicity. Leaves patient susceptible to 
other diseases and infections, often 
leading to death from these causes. Ex- 
tremely serious side-6ffects. No evi- 
dence that treated patients live any 
longer, on the average, than untreated 
patients. Statistical rate of long-term 
survival after metastasis is close to 

Side effects include^ increased appetite, 
weight gain, lowered blood pressure, in- 
creased hemoglobin and red blood cell 
count. Eliminates or sharply reduces p^in 
without narcotics . Builds up body' s resis- 
tance to other diseases. Is a natural com- 
pound found in foods and, as such, is 
totally compatible with human biological 
experience. Destroys cancer cells while 
nourishing non-cancer cells. Considering 
that most patients begin vitamin therapy 
only after they have been cut, burned, or 
poisoned 'by orthodox treatments and 
have been-told that there no longer is any 
hope, the number of patients who have 
been brought back to normal health on a 
long-term survival basis (10-20%) is most 

/ Turning, at last, to the question of cancer 
research, we find that it is plagued with exactly the 
same frustrations and self-induced failures as 

208 WOWLD WlfffOpf CANCER: Part One 

cancer therapy.. Almost all current research proj- 
ects are preoccupied with the question of how to 
cure cancer rather than what is cancer. Conse^ 
quently, the basic problem of cancer research today 
remains one of fimdamerit^ i^smv than applied 

The 1926, Thirteenth Edition of the 
Encyclopedia Britannic a says of cancer theories: 

The very number and variety of 
hypotheses show that npne are estab- 
lished. Most of them attempt to explain 
the growth but not the origin of the dis- 
~ease. : ~, 

j ' ~ - 

Unfortunately, wheii applied to orthodox 

medicine, that statement is just as true today as it 
was in 1 926. As a result* researchers have come up 
with a constantly lengthening list of things thatsup- 
posedly ^cause" cancer — everything from smog 
in the air to insecticides: pn our raw fruits and 
vegetables* to a multitude of obs6ure viruses*. Not 
recognising that all of these merely act as trigger 
mechanisms for the real cause .— an enzyme and 
vitamin- deficiency — they then run off in all di- 
rections at once trj&ng to find a thousand separate 
"cures," each designed^pecifically to filter out 
the smog, to eliminate the insecticide, to destroy 
the virus, and so on. The more they research, the 
more "causes" they discover, and the more hope- 
less becomes their task. 

In spite of this fact, almost daily we can read in 


our press encouraging stories about how we are on 
the very brink of a tremendous cancer break- 
through. On September 23, 1972, the Los Angeles 
Herald-Examiner even announced to the world in 
bold front-page* headlines: CANCER CURE 
FOUND! And respected researchers from the 
nationr's most prestigious medical institutions 
parade routinely before our television cameras to 
tell us how their latest findings have, at last, brought 
the solution to the cancer problem well within their 
grasp. We have been "on the verge of a great break- 
through' ' for decades! 

The reason for this is simple. These men are 
the beneficiaries of gigantic research grants from 
the federal government, tax-exempt foundations, 
and from the American Cancer Society. They must 
claim to be making encouraging progress or else 
their funding will not be continued. If they reported 
honestly that they have worked for years, have 
directed tfye activities of a large staff consuming 
many thousands of man-hours, and have spent 
hundreds of thousands of dollars to produce noth- 
ing of consequence — wejl, one can imagine what N 
would happen to the future funding of their research 
project. The cancer research pie nowis reaching 
out to the multi-billion dollar mark annually. The 
ones who will get the biggest slice out of that lucra- 
tive pie are the ones who claim to be "oil the verge 
of a great breakthrough," for who would want to be 
responsible for cutting off funds just when the cure 
appeared so close? 

In the meantime, researchers are busying 


themselves, not in trying to understand what cancer 
is, but in finding a substance or a treatment to get rid 
of it. And it seems that, the more wild the theory, 
the better chance it has of getting federal money. 

A rapid survey of recent research grants, as 
reported in the press, reveafs a series of headlines 
that tell the story by themselves: SEA SQUIRTS 
DOCTORS, (National Enquirer); WAITING IN 
THE WINGS? (Medical World News): 

This last headline perhaps needs expansion. 
The article began: 

On an educated hunch that insects syn- N 
thesize compounds that can inhibit cell 
growth, chemist George R. Pettit of the 
University of Arizona in Tempe has 
spent six years and some $100*000 ex- 
tracting chemicals from a quarter of a 
million butterflies . . . part of a National 
Cancer Institute program. ... 

To get his butterflies, Dr. Pettit enlisted 
the help of 500 collectors in Taiwan. 

And so the search goes on — rat poison, jet 
fuel, butterfly wings, sea squirts — everything ex- 
cept the natural foods of man. 


It is significant that the only time orthodox 
research produces really tangible ^and useful infor- 
mation is when it is in conformity with the tropho- 
blastic thesis of cancer. Or, stated another way, 
there is nothing in the realm of solid scientific knowl- 
edge gained through recent research that does not 
conform to the" trophoblastic thesis of cancer. This 
is true 1 of a wide range of research projects. 

For example, the recent excitement over the 
possibility of BCG. acting as an anti-cancer agent is 
in conformity with the fact that the body's white 
blood cells are a front-line defense mechanism 
against cancer, as beautifully theorized by Dr. John 
Beard almost a century ago. 

Dr. Robert Good,' president of the Sloan- 
Kettering Institute for Cancer Research, while 
previously serving as chairman of the Pathology 
Department of the University of Minnesota, discov- 
ered that altering the protein content of the diet in 
mice appears to have an effect on increasing their 
resistance to cancer. He said: tl The work raises 
questions about the role of diet in human cancer. ' ' 

His studies were sparked after observing that 
the aborigines of Australia consumed a low- 
protein diet and showed an excellent immunity to 
cancer. The good Doctor Good was on the right 
track. 1 

- Dr. J. N. Davis, Professor of Pathology at 
Albany Medical College, also stumbled across a 

^'Protein Study — Diet Linked to Cancer Control," San Francisco 
Chronicle, October 21 , 1971 . Also, "American College of Surgeons, A 
New Cancer Link; Gene- Pool Pollution,** Modern Medicine, Nov. 29, 
1971, p. 13. ' * 


part of the solution when he noticed that there was a 
staggering increase in cancer of the esophagus in 
Kenya, Africa, in the last thirty years, while there 
was practically Kione in neighboring Uganda. He 
noticed, also, that there appears to be some kind of 
relationship between cancer of the colon and diet. 
He asked, "Why should there be a low incidence of 
colon cancer in poor countries where food is 

For those familiar wittr the traditionally high 
nitriloside content of unrefined foods in poor coun- 
tries, the answer is obvious. If Dr. Davis keeps 
asking the right questions, sooner or later he is 
bound to find the right answers. And then he will 
have the whole medical establishment to fight. In 
the meantime, he has come to the conclusion that 
the reason for the difference may be found in the 
types of beer drunk in these two countries — which 
may not be too far off, for the different beers are 
made out of different grains such as maize, sor- 
ghum, and millet, all of which have varying con- 
centrations of vitamin B17. 1 But as long as x Df. 
Davis theorizes only about the beer and not the 
vitamin, he will retain the respect of his colleagues 
and probably will continue to receive funding for his 
research program. 

And so it goes. Over and over again, the 
trophoblastic thesis (fact) of cancer is confirmed 
and strengthened by independent researchers who, 
unfortunately, have no inkling of the significance of « 

'See "Seek Clues to Dramatic Rise of Throat Cancer in Kenya,' 
Infectious Diseases. July 2, 1972. 


their discoveries. Some of them, of course, eventu- 
ally do begin to grasp the picture. Dr. Bruce Hol- 
stead, for instance, is Director and founder of the 
World Life Research Institute of Colton, Califor- 
nia, which, incidentally, is supported partly by 
funds from the U.N. He has travelled to the Soviet 
Union and discovered that scientists^ihere are 
studying natural non-toxic compounds and appear 
to be way ahead of the United States in this field. 
He speaks glowingly of one such compound called 
Eleuteroc^ccus which, from his description, 
sounds suspiciously like pangamic acid or vitamin 
B15 discovered by Dr. Krebs. 

At any rate, Dr. Holstead has been unsuccess- 
ful in getting the FDA to approve experimentation 
with this compound. He complains: 

I've tried everywhere. I can't get any 
pharmaceutical company to support it 
because of the FDA's regulations which 
are for specifics. This is where the whole 
field of medicine is in conflict. 

Dr. Holstead also is on the right track, which 
undoubtedly is why he is now running up against a 
stone Avail of resistance from the Medical and Polit- 
ical Establishment. After noting that Congress had 
just authorized 1.6 billion dollars for cancer re- 
search, he said that, in his opinion, it would not 
produce results because it all would be spent for 
research into exotic and toxic artificial drugs rather 


than in the investigation of natural non-toxic com- 
pounds. Then he added: 

I predict that cures for cancer can be ex- 
pected out of the natural products field. 
Someday we'll discover that some native 
population had the cancer cure product 
and was using it. They may not have been 
using it intentionally for this reason, but 
we'll find out that they were using it, and 
the results were bona fide. 

I believe that if we could really do a 
thorough study of all the natural occur- 
ring materials used by primitive tribes on 
a world scale, wp (the U.S.) could be- 
come a highly-productive area of cancer 
research. 1 

But this is not the approach of those govern- 
ment agencies that now dictate to the half-free men 
of medicine. Instead, infatuated with their -newly 
acquired skills in creating marvelously Complex ar- 
tificial chemicals, they scorn nature and plunge bil- 
lions of tax dollars into their poisonous- 6oncoc<- 
tions. And, as scores of these drugs are developed 
each y$ar, cancer patients become the human 
guinea pigs upon which they are tested. 

Not all testing, of course, is in an attempt to 

,tl Russia, U.S. Join Ranks in Cancer Battle Project/' LA. Herald- 
Examiner. Feb. 20, 1972, p. A- 18. 


cure cancer. Much of it is done just because the 
researchers have at their disposal large numbers of 
patients who, as they reason, are going to die any- 
way, so why not use their bodies while they still 
have some me. If that sounds like too harsh a judg- 
ment, then consider the research project funded by 
the federal government at the Maryland Psychiatric 
Research Center in Cantonsville. The project was 
headed by Dr. Stanislav Grof, a Czecho- 
slovakian-born psychiatrist who specializes in the 
use of psychedelic drugs, particularly LSD. 

The story here is so bizarre that many persons 
will find it hard to believe. So let us examine the 
eye-witness account of a special reporter to the 
Washington Post who visited the research center 
and observed video-tapes of some bf the experi- 
ments. The reporter, by the way, was extremely 
sympathetic to the entire experimental program and 
presented it in the most favorable light possible. But 
even in spite of this bias, the report is a shocking 
exposd of the total disregard that these men have 
for the human "specimens" given to them fof ex- 

~" On the morning of his session* the patient 
is given a single red rose in a vase. The 
center's music therapist has selected a 
program intended to heighten the experi- 
ence — Vivaldi, Beethoven, BaCh, 
Wagner, Simon and Garfunkel, the 
Balinese Ramazana monkey chant, and 
others. . . . 


Here is aa example of. one session pre- 
\ served on video-tape: The cancer patient, 
"a laborer in his late forties who was de- 
pressed and afraidof his imminent death, 
was apprehensive as he sat on the couch 
talking with Grof and the nurse. 

"It hurts so bad," he said in a choked 
voice. "I never cry, I mean I can'thelpit, 
but I've got to let it come out sooner or 
later." He sobbed, and Grof comforted 
him. - 

The nurse injected him intravenously 
with a single high dose of LSD, and he 
waited the ten to thirty minutes for it to 
start to take effect. When it did; he 
reacted with fear. 6 T don't know what to 
do," he cried, and he moaned and even- 
tually vomited into a pan. ... 

* The patient, wearing the customary 
eyeshades, finally relaxed. Grof soothed 
him with a few words then slipped a 
istereophonic headset river his ears. The 
patient was overcome with the mighty 
sound of the Morman Tabernacle Choir 
singing "The Lord's Prayer." 

He lay motionless. 

Cantons ville v 's therapists prefer to play 
an indirect role, letting the patients make 


their own discoveries. So Grof sat back, 
and after a long while the patient started 
uttering words: 

"Like a ball of fire. Everything was 

. dumped into this that I can remember. 

Everything was destroyed in a final way. 

^ It had all disappeared. I don't remember, 

but whoever it was said they was set free. 

Somebody was free, I don't know who it 

was. I don't know who it was, but he was 

- free." 

Grof a^ked the patient if it was he who 
was set free, and the man replied, "Yes, 

yes." 1 

The next day, the patient was convinced he 
had had a genuine religious experience. The staff 
was pleased because, as they explained it, they had 
helped the patient to find 4 ' meaning in his life and to 
enjoy his last months more fully." 

Four days later, the man died from cancer. 

It is shocking to learn that, under the code of 
ethics followed by the FDA and the medical pro- 
fession it now controls, it is not necessary to advise 
a patient that he or she is being experimented upon. 
This is an ominous fact, not only in regard to the 
patient who is receiving the experimental drug, but 
also to the patient who expects medical help but 

'"LSD Therapy: Quiet Revolution in Medicine," LA. Times, Dec. 
15, 1972, Part VII, pp. 10, 11. 


who is placed into the control" group and, thus, re- 
ceives placebos — np help at all. Robert N. 
Veatch, a specialist in medical ethics, told a Senate 
Health Subcommittee in 1973 that, in just one typi- 
cal research project, ninety-one-children acting as 
controls in a study of treatment for asthma "re- 
ceived ineffective treatment for periods lasting up- 
to fourteen years." He confirmed also that "i)0^ 
mother or child in the study knew any sort of study 
was underway." 1 - 

As of 1970, there were over 100,000 cancer 
patients who had been used in experiments without 
.either their knowledge or consent. 2 

In a report prepared for the Chairman of a 
Senate Subcommittee, and published in the Con- 
gressional Record of Octobers, 1966, Dr. Miles H. 
Robinson revealed: / 

An undetermined number of cancer pa- 
tients with an otherwise substantial ex- 
pectation of life have died in these tests, 
according to reports in NCI's Cancer 
Chemotherapy Reports. The full extent 
of mortality and morbidity is difficult to 
estimate, since the journal's editor told 
me only the "best" investigations are 
published. 3 

'"Unethical Experiments Hit," Prevention, July, .1973, p. 97. 
2 Omar Garrison, The Dktocrats, (Books for Today, Ltd.; Chicago, 
London, Melbourne, 1970), p. 271. 
Hbid., p. 273. 


The following statements are taken from just a 
few of these "best" official Chemotherapy Re- 

An effort was made to choose patients 
who were well enough to withstand the 

anticipated toxicity Unexpectedly, 

early death of twp of the first five patients 
treated caused a reduction to 8.0 
mg/kg/day. No significant anti-tumor 
benefit of any duration was observed. . ; . . 

In this study, six of the^ eight patients i 
[children] died. . . . No therapeutic ef- 
fect was observed. Toxic clinical man- 
ifestations consisted of vomiting, . 
hypotension, changes in oral mucus 
/ membranes, and diarrhea, in that order of 
frequency. Renal damage and cerebral 
edema were observed at postmortem ex- 
amination in each of the six patients who 
died while receiving this drug. . . . 

The death of two patients was une- 
quivocally caused by drug toxicity. . . . 
Eight of the fourteen patients who sur- 
vived their initial courses of therapy 
showed rapid general deterioration, and 
died within Jen weeks after therapy 
began. It was our opinion that drug 



toxicity contributed to the rapid demise 
of these patients 

^ Because of severe toxicity, which led to 
the death'of a number of the forty patients 
initially treated with the full five-day 
"priming doses" used by the Wisconsin 
workers, investigators in the Eastern 
group voted to omit the fifth " priming " 
doses of each course. 1 

It is a fact that many of these experiments are 
carried out, not to see if the drug is effective against 
cancer, but only to determine how much of it can be 
administered before the patient becomes ill or dies 
from its toxic effect. 

It is difficult for the average person to fathom 
the full depth of these legalized tortures and mur- 
ders committed on unsuspecting victims in the 
name of science. And it is a sad commentary that so 
many people in and near the medicaLprofession 
accept them without protest. In fact, it is insult 
added to injury when the FDA finances and en- 
courages the wider use of these killer-drugs while at 
the same time, forbidding doctors- to experiment 
with Laetrile — which is known to be at least a 
thousand times less toxic — on the absurd conten- 
tion that it has not yet been proven to be safe! The 
fact is that none of the FDA-approved cancer drugs 
has been proven to be safe, and most of them, quite 

v lb\d. pp. 273, 274. 


to the contrary, have been proven to be extremely 
ijnsafe. And the American Cancer Society has the 
gall to label the use of Laetrile as "a new dimension 
of murder," when, in reality, it is they and their 
worthless, unproven nostrums that truly have 
earned this epithet. 





The inherent weaknesses of all 

caficer statistics; the need for 

statistical comparisons in spite of 

these weaknesses; the methods of 

computing statistical values Jor 

both brthodox and nutritional 

therapies; and a reflection on the 

consequences of 

consensus medicine. 

A major part of the t6tal effort of the American 
Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute is. 
devoted to gathering statistics. Each year the rec- 
ords of thousands of physicians and hospitals are 
combed through to produce cancer statistics by 
age, sex, geography, site, extent, type of treatment, 
and length of survival. It is a mammoth task con- 
suming hundreds of thousands of man-hours and 
millions of dollars. This activity is about as impor- 
tant to victory over cancer as is a body count in time 
of war. The experts know all about who has cancer 
but nothing about how to cure it. 

Unlike the proponents of orthodox medicine 
who publish reams of statistics on just aboutevery- 



thing, the proponents of vitamin therapy are ex- 
tremely reluctant to speak in these terms. At first 
this may appear as a lack of confidence on their part 
or, even worse, as an indication that they really 
don't have any solid evidence to back up their 
claims. Upon analysis * however, their reluctance is 
well-founded. - - 

First of all, in order to have statistics from 
which meaningful comparisons can be made, there 
has to be a control group. In other words, it would 
be necessary for those, who believe in vitamin 
therapy to accept cancer patients but then not to 
treat them or to treat them with orthodox therapies. 
This, of course, to the physicians involved would 
be tantamount to murder, and they never could 
participate in it. These men have already witnessed 
the tragic results of orthodox therapies on patients 
who CQme to them as a last resort. To ask these 
physicians to assign some of their patients to a 
continuation of these treatments would be like ask- 
ing them to place a hot poker on human flesh to s$e 
if it would cause burns and pain. And yet, not to set 
up such control groups would leave an opening for 
the claim that, if the patient recovers, it would be 
due to "spontaneous regressionr'* or "delayed re- 
sponse of the orthodox treatments. " 

Another fact is that, even if control groups 
were to be set up, it would be impossible to make 
sure that they were meaningful. There are so many 
variables in such factors as location of cancer, de- 
gree of metastasis, dietary background, hereditary 
characteristics, emotional state, age, sex, general 


health, medical history, environment, and so on. 
Almost any of these variables could be claimed as 
reasons for invalidating the statistics. 

Whenever the proponents of vitamin therapy 
have attempted to offer surveys of their clinical 
results, the proponents of orthodox medicine have 
descended on them like a swarm of locusts con- 
demning them because their studies did not have 
adequate control groups, or that their results could 
be explained by some other factors, or that their 
follow-up records were inadequate. Arid who can 
argue with these objections? But exactly these 
same weaknesses are present in all of the statistical 
studies of orthodox medicine as well, and not one of 
them could stand up under the same kind x*f nega- 
tive scrutiny that they apply to those they so readily 
condemn! The only difference is that theirs are not 
challenged because they are presumed to be accu- 

The truth of the matter is that, because of the 
many variables previously mentioned, there is no 
field of medicine in which statistics are mqre con- 
fusing and meaningless than in the field of cancer. 
In fact, there are many times when pathologists will 
disagree among themselves as to whether or not a 
particular tissue even is cancer. So it is not just the 
nutritional therapist whose statistics are open to 

But it is only the nutritional therapist who, 
generally speaking, honestly recognizes these prob- 
lems and, consequently, is reluctant to speak in 
terms of hard numbers or ratios. Dr. Krebs, for 


example, repeatedly has refused to quote statistics 
because he thinks they are meaningless from a sci- 
entific point of view and cannot prove the reality of 
his theory. Anyone who insists on numbers, he 
says, reveals his lack of understanding of the scien- 
tific concept involved. It would be like trying to 
prove the value of oxygen by collecting case his- 
tories of people who claim that breathing saved 1 
their lives. Of course, it ^ved their lives. But any- 
one who didn't believe it could find a hundred plau- 
sible explanations as to why something other than 
oxygen was responsible for their being alive. 

Dr. Richardson also advised strongly against 
using statistics, and then added: 

But this is a vitamin and enzyme defi- 
ciency disease. We dare not talk about 
five-year survivals when we are really 
talking about 100% survival with 
prophylaxis [prevention]. When you start 
killing people with radiomimetic insults 
to their bodies — you're talking about 
radiation deaths, not deaths from cancer. 

There are several other reasons for not 
using their false and misleading yard- 
sticks. One is that this yardstick is not 
applied to vitamin deficiency diseases. 
Later on when BiV is accepted ... we 
may appear the fool by having cheapened 
ourpresentation by acquiescing in the use 
of the yardstick. Anyone who begins to 


see the vitamin aspect soon realizes that it 
is like measuring water and steel with the 
same clumsy apparatus. 1 

It is obvious, therefore, that the reluctance to 
deal in statistics on the part of proponents of vita- 
min therapy — - a reluctance not shared bylhe pro- 
ponents of orthodox therapy — is based upon a re- 
spect for scientific truth. In spite of this, however, 
the general public clamors for a statistical compari- 
son, and it is not apt to take the trouble to study the 
problems deeply enough to understand why such 
comparisons are not to be trusted. The result is that 
orthodox medicine, with its-mountains of statistical 
charts and tables, easily wins the race for public 
opinion, while the nutritionists are condemned to 
the role of quacks, charlatans, and murderers. 

Let us make it an honest race. Without defend- 
ing the value of such. statistics, let us at least see 
what they tell us, such as they are. Let us acknowl- 
edge that one should view all cancer statistics with 
great reservation, but let us also give the nutritional 
therapists the same right to use them that theircritics 
have enjoyed. 

On May 5, 1972, a press conference was held at 
the White House by Dr. Frank J. Rauscher on the 
occasion of his appointment as Director of the Na- 
tional Cancer Institute. After speaking of plans for 
international cooperation in the search for a cancer 
cure, he then turned his attention to the current 

Verier from John Richardson, M.D., to G. Edward Griffin, dated 
August 2, 1972. ■ t .. v 


level of successful "cures" already being achieved 
by surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy. He said: 

We know, 4 for instance, that of the one 
hundred cancers that afflict man, about 
fifteen percent of these can be treated 
extremely well, to the point of at least 
fifty percent five-year survivals. 

Unscrambled, that means that, on the average, 
the best that can be claimed is a seven-and-a-half 
percent long-term survival. (15% x.50 % = 7Vi%). 
And that figure includes those patients who survive 
without treatment of any kind, which means that the 
rate for those who survive with (in spite of ?) treat- 
ment actually is even less. 1 But let us accept this 
figure at face value and agree that the current aver- 
age \*cure rate" is seven-and-a-half percent. 

The statistics of the American Cancer Society 
are considerably more optimistic. They have said 
that, according to present rates, cancer will strike 
two out of every three families. Of every six deaths 
from all causes, one is from cancer. And, of every 
three persons who get cancer, one will be saved and 
two will die. 2 One out of three, therefore, repre- 
sents an ACS "cure rate" of approximately thirty- 
three percent. 

These figures ,-of course, are heavily weighted 
to present the most favorable picture possible. •* As 

^his fact was brought to Dr. Rauscher's attention in a letter from Dr. 
Dean Burk, dated April 20, 1973, op, cit. 

2 Cancer Facts and Figures' ACS, 1972, pp. 3,4. 


mentionedjDreviously, they include the relatively 
non-fatal cancers such as skin cancer, and they do 
not include those patients who die from cancer be- 
fore they have completed their prescribed course of 
treatment — which is a substantial number. 

Of course, we cannot use both statistics. So, 
for the sake of making a stab at a comparison with 
nutritional therapy, let's put the two together and 
take an average. This produces a survival rate of 
approximately twenty percent for all cancers and all 
groups together. And then, just to make sure that 
we are estimating on the conservative side and giv- 
ing every benefit of the doubt, lef 's add another five 
percent as a margin of errpr and use the figure of 
twenty-five percent. 

Now let us attempt to break this down into 
three categories: 


Those whose cancer has disseminated to 
two or more distant locations, who have 
not responded to surgery, radiation, or 
drugs, and who have been told by their 
doctor that there no longer is any hope. 

whose cancer has been detected before 
extensive metastasis to a distant location, 
and which appears sufficiently limited, 
regional, or slow-growing to offer some 
hope of successful control by orthodox 
treatments. Skin cancernot included in 
this category. 


who are in reasonably good health and 
who have no qlinical cancer to begin with . 

Admittedly, these categories are not absolute. 
They are rightly subject to all the criticisms of any 
such statistical categorization. The first two are 
especially dependent upon the subjective evalua- 
tion of the physician since no one can point out the 
clear dividing line between them. But, whatever- 
errors might be generated by these problems will 
work randomly and equally on behalf of both or- 
thodox and nutritional therapies. Neither will have 
an advantage. c 

The chances of a terminal cancer patient sur- 
viving five years after the point at which he has been 
classified as such are so small as to defy statistical 
statement. Most physicians will say that there isn't 
one chance out often thousand, Some will say one 
out of a thousand. Let's not quibble. We shall use 
the more favorable figure which is one-tenth of one 

When it comes to "moderate spread" canqers, 
it is difficult to know what figures to use. An unoffi- 
cian poll conducted by the author in 1 972 directed to 
a random group of Southern California doctors, 
producecfan "opinion" of approximately fifteen 
percent long-term survival in this category. The 
American Cancer Society was unable to produce 
either statistics or opinion. But, more recently, a 
letter was received from the National Cancer Insti- 
tute which claims that "regional spread" (as distin- 


guished from "distant spread") cancer patients can 
anticipate a five-year survival of a whopping 
twenty-eight percent! 1 Frankly, that is extremely 
difficult to believe, even allowing for all the built-in 
enhancement factors. But, folio wing our practice of 
taking these statistics as we find them, let us accept 
this one also, even if it is with an extremely large 
grain of salt. 

For those who are presently healthy with po 
cancer at all, we return to the American Cancer 
Society's statement that- one out of four (25%) 
Americans will get cancer. We previously esti- 
mated from a synthesis of the ACS and NCI statis- 
tics that apparently twenty-five percent of those 
who contract cancer will survive five, years. That 
means, of course, that seventy-five percent will die. 
So, if seventy-five percent out of the twenty-five 
percent will die, that is a net fatality rate of approx- 
imately nineteen percent, .and an overall survival 
rate of approximately eighty-one percent. 

Here, then, is a summary of our statistical con- 
clusions regarding long-term survival: 




'Letter from Marvin A. Schneiderman, Ph.D., Associate Scientific 
Director for Demography, NCI, to G. Edward Griffin, dated March' 



Now let's turn to the record of vitamin 

As mentioned several times previously, almost 
all of the patients who have sought out Laetrile have 
done so only after they have moved into the ad- 
vanced or "terminal" category. The fact that most 
of them do not survive five years after beginning 
vitamin and enzyme therapy is not surprising. What 
is Surprising is that any of them' should be saved at 
this late stage. Yet, Doctor Contreras of Mexico, 
one of the few doctors who has been using Laetrile 
for a long enough period to be able to spieak of 
jfive-year survivals, reports that approximately fif- 
teen percent of his patients have survived this 
period or longer. Fifteen percent, of course, is not 
good. But considering that less than one-tenth of 
one percent survive under orthodox therapy, that 
record is truly amazing. Even more encouraging is 
the fact that the rate of survival obtained by doctors 
who have been using Laetrile only for three or four 
years promises eventually to produce a five-year 
rate substantially higher thanfifteen percent. But, 
for the purposes of our comparison, let us use the 
lower firmly-established, and more conservative 

Those whose cancer has not yet metastasized 
v to distant secondary locations and%ho, thus, fall 
into the "moderate spread" category can look for- 
ward to approximately an eighty percent long-term 
survival in response to vitamin therapy. Soirfe doc- 
tors are finding the response as high as eighty-five 
percent, providing the vital organs have not been 


too badly damaged by surgical, X-ray, or chemical 
intervention during prior treatment. 1 

Of those who presently are healthy with no 
clinical cancer at all, close to one hundred percent 
can expect to be free from cancer as long as they 
routinely obtain adequate amounts of vitamin B17, 
and, presuming, of course, that they are not subject 
to some fare pancreas malfunction or subjected to a 
totally unnatural exposure to carcinogenic agents 
such as massive radiation. Fortunately, the "con- 
trol group" for this category already has been pro- 
vided through the existence of the Hunzas, the 
Abkhasians, the Eskimos, the Hopi and Navajo 
Indians, and many other similar groups around the 

Putting the two columns of statistics together, 
here is the story they tell: 













*An 80% survival was reported by the McNaughton Foundation inihe 
6th volume of its data submitted to the FDA in connection with. its 
IND-6734 application for Phase One testing of Laetrile. See Cancer 
News Journal, Vol. 6, No. I, Jan./Apr., 1971, p. 12. Also, Dr. 
Richardson has stated: "The second category of early detection — say 
the lump and bump stage and without radio mimetic or surgical interfer- 
ence y-'will have a 75% to 85% survival (5 yr.)." Lettef to G. Edward 
Griffin, dated Dec. 2, 1972. 


It bears repeating still one more time that all 
cancer statistics are subject to a host of unseen and 
undefined premises and* consequently, are useful 
only for the most general reference purpose. These, 
in particular, because they attempt to present a 
composite picture, can be extremely misleading 
when it comes to applying them to any particular 
person with any particular condition. The data that 
goes into these figures varies widely depending on 
age,, sex, cancer location, and degree of malig- 
nancy. Also, the categories are extremely arbitrary 
when it comes to, separating moderately spread 
cancers from thosethat are far advanced, for often 
there is a grey area between the two. Nevertheless, 
for those who simply must have statistics, these are 
as accurate as any such tabulation can be and, 
especially considering that they have given titer 
proponents of orthodox treatments every conceiv- 
able advantage, they tell an impressive story that 
cannot be brushed aside. 

As physicians become aware of these facts and 
begin to experiment with the nutritional approach 
to cancer therapy, they soon find themselves the 
victims of something called consensus medicine. 
Consensus medicine is the tangible result of the 
belief that doctors need to "be policed in order to 
prevent them from injuring or cheating their pa- 
tients, and that the best people to police doctors are 
other doctors acting through professional organiza- 
tions, hospital staffs, and-government agencies. 
The result of this seemingly proper arrangement is 
that, no matter how useless or even harmful cutrent 


practices may be, consensus medicine demands 
that they, be used by every physician. Regardless of 
how many patients are lost, the doctor's profes- 
sional standing is upheld because those who pass 
judgment through "peer review" are using the 
same treatments and getting the same tragic results. 
On the other hand, if a doctor deviates from this 
pattern and dares to apply nutrition as the basis of 
his treatment, even /ff he attains a high degree of 
success, he is condemned as a quack. He loses his 
hospital privileges, is denied malpractice insur- 
ance, and even becomes subject to arrest. 

The result of this is that many physicians are 
just as afraid of cancer as their patients — afraid 
that they may miss a diagnosis or cause a month 
delay before surgery. They may know in their own 
mind that the extra mfonth really makes little differ- 
ence in the survival of the patient, but they know it 
will make a gre&t difference in their reputations. It 
takes a brave man not to operate or recommend 
radiation, or drugs. This is especially true if he 
knows that, if the patient dies anyway, relative's of 
the deceased could easily institute a malpractice 
law suit against him on the grounds that he did not 
do all that he could have done or should have done. 
And, in light of the present abysmal ignorance 
about the true nature of cancer, it would be next to 
impossible for the doctor to convince either the 
judge or the jury that theTpaitieht would have died 
anyway, even without the "benefit" of surgery, 
radiation, or drugs. This is especially true if a 
spokesman for the American Cancer Society were 


called to the witness stand and unleashed the 
"statistic" of a million-and-a-half who, sup- 
posedly, are now alive only because of such treat- 

And so the physician cannot follow his own 
judgment or his own conscience. He gets into far 
more trouble by prescribing a few non-toxic vita- 
mins than by prescribing the most radical surgery or 
violent chemical poisons. All but the very brave toe 
the line. That is consensus medicine. 

The hard fact of life is that — consensus or no 
consensus, statistics or no statistics. — cancer is a 
disease for which orthodox medicine does not have 
either a cure or control worthy of being called such. 
And the rate of cancer deaths continues to climb 
every year in spite of billions of dollars and millions 
of man-hours spent annually in search for even a 
clue. Under the circumstances it seems more than 
ironic that those who have failed to find the answer 
themselves spend so much of their time and energy 
condemning and harassing others who merely want 
the freedom to be able to choose an ^alternate ap- 

Dr. Krebs often has commented that using a 
Chinese prayer wheel would produce just as good 
or possibly better results, than orthodox treatment. 
< And this is not said in jest, for the use of such a 
prayer wheel would be the same as no treatment at 
all whichT at least, mercifully would spare the pa- 
tient the deadly sidereffects of radiation and chemi- 
cal poisoning. One cannot expect to cure cancer by 
removing only the tumor, for the tumor is the 


symptom or the result of cancer, not the cause. One 
cannot expect to burn away or cut away a chronic 
deficiency disease. 

"Cancer," says Dr. Krebs, "is properly de- 
scribed as one of the last outposts of mysticisifun 
medical science." He is referring, of course, to the 
great wall of. ignorance and prejudice and vested 

, interest that still prevents large numbers of 
present-day scientists — men who like to fancy that 
they are above such traits — from objectively view- 
ing the evidence all around them and humbly admit : 
ting that they have been wrong. And it is a humbling 

. experience for a man who has spent a lifetime learn- 
ing complex surgical procedures, creating elaborate 
man-made chemical structures, or mastering mon- 
ster ray machines, to accept in the end that during 
all these years the answer was right under his nose 
— not as the product of his brilliant intelligence and 
technical manipulation of the cosmos — but in the 
form of a simple food factor found in the lowly apple 
seed. §o he persists in his quest for the complex 
answer. Yet, just as we are amused ,today at the 
primitive medical practices of history — the trepan- 
ning of skulls, the bloodletting, the medicinal elixirs 
of dog hair, goose grease, lizard blood, or old Indian 
Kickapoo Juice — future generations surely will 
look back at our own era and cringe at the senseless 
cutting, burning, and poisoning that now passes for 
medical science. 



VITAMIN B it \. v 

Charles Gurchot, Ph.D.* 

Oral doses of vitamin B17 seem not to be much 
affected by the action of the acid medium of the 
stomach, but pass into the intestine where the sub- 
stance is acted upon by bacterial enzymes. 

In the intestine the enzyme complex_Emulsin 
containing the enzymes j8-glucosidase, Ben- 
zocyanase, and others, degrades the Amygdalin 
into four components: Hydrocyanic acid, Benzal- 
dehyde, Prunasin, and Mandelonitrile, which are 
absorbed into the lymph and portal circulations. 

Cyanide is converted to thiocyanate probably 
in the blood circulation, and certainly in the liver by 
the enzyme rhodanese in the presence of sulfur- 
beariiig compounds. The circulating thiocya- 
nate exerts certain physiological effects on blood 
pressure and thyroid action, and is not excreted 
rapidly. (In the absence of the enzyme or sulfur, the 
cyanide may form cyano-hemoglobin.) 

, In cancer patients some thiocyanate finds its 
way to the site of the cancer lesion. 

The benzaldehyde formed in the intestine 

♦Reprinted with permission from Physician's Handbook of Vitamin 
Bn Therapy, (Science Press International, Sausalito, Calif., 1973). 



probably has no important function, but in the cir- 
culation forms benzoic acid and is excreted as ben- 
zaldehyde hippurate. 

Prunasin (the mono-glucoside of ^faiideloni- 
trile) can circulate in the body and reach the malig- 
nant lesion, and as such hydrolyse to liberate hyd- 
rocyanic acid, benzaldehyde, and one glucose 

Prunasin may also be changed in the liver to 
Mandelonitrile glucuronoside. This conversion to 
the glucuronoside may take place in two different 
ways: 1) by combining with glucuronic acid, which 
woul4 remove one sugar molecule; 2) by oxidation 
of the terminal alcohol group of the prunasin glu- 
cose molecule. ." 

The mandelonitrile is absorbed from the intes- 
tine, going directly to the liver where it is converted 
by the detoxification mechanism of joining it to 
glucuronic acid. \X may then be excreted as the 
glucuronide or find its way to the site of a malignant 

Glucosidic enzymes at the lesion may hy- 
drolase prunasin into its components cyanide, ben- 
zaldehyde, and a glucose molecule, to interfere 
with tissue respiration. In the process of enzyme 
hydrolysis pure mandelonitrile, as an intermediate 
step, may be released. 

Mandelonitrile of itself may undergo spon- 
taneous hydrolysis to HCN and benzaldehyde or 
enzymatic decomposition by benzocyanase present 
in the emulsin complex. 

Mandelonitrile glucuronide may be hydf olysed 


at the tumor site byjS-glucuronidase to yield HCN, 
benzaldehyjie and glucuronic acid. 

Benzaldehyde released through these proces- 
ses at the site of the malignant lesion may be re- 
duced to benzyl alcohol, and combine with the 
thibcyanate to form benzo thiocyanate. This com- 
pound is further reduced to a thio-alcohol, benzo 
mercaptain, and hydrocyanic acid. In this manner 
HCN reappears and may continue to do so in a 
cyclic maimer until the intracellular conditions that 
permit the reaction involved, in the cycle are no / 
longer operative. 

These phenomena would explain the. synergis- 
tic effect of benzaldehyde and cyanide in depres- 
sing the metabolism of mouse tumor slices in the 
Warburg apparatus. 

In the absence of rhodanese the cyanide prob- 
ably exerts its lethal effects on cell respiration, 
which is relatively small in cancer cells, by interfer- 
ence with the cytochrome oxidase enzymes. 

Cyanide, either as such, or as mandelonitrile, 
may combine with glucose to form cyanoglucose, 
which, on hydrolysis forms a glucuronide heptose 
analogous to gluconic acid, which would be ex- 
creted, or dehydrogenated to heptose, which also 
would be excreted. The conditions for this trans- 
formation exist in cancer tissue and would consti- 
tute anti-gluconeogenesis. 




By Ro'bert G. Houston* 


The rarity and mildness of sickle cell anemia in 
black parts of Africa and the West Indies as com- 
pared with those in, the U.S. is associated with a 
prevalence of thiocyanate yielding foods in native 
tropical diets, and parallels a divergence in the inci- 
dence of both neoplastic and rheumatoid diseases. 
Cyanate, an inhibitor of sickling, develops from the 
oxidation of thiocyanate, which is formed from vi- 
tamin B17, dr nitritosides (beta-cyanogenetic 
glucosides), in food plants. Clinical use of cyanate 
and of thiocyanate has ameliorated sickle cell 
anemia at dosage levels derivable fropi African 
dietST It is proposed that the disease represents an 
unrelieved nutritional dependency on thiocyanate' 
and nitrilosides in those genetically affected. 


Many chronic anemias were proved to be nu- 
tritional deficiency conditions. .Involvement of nu- 
tritional factors in sickle cell anemia has precedent 

"•Reprinted with permission of the author, 115 E. 86th Street, New 
York, N.Y. 10028 



in reports 1 " 3 that this genetic disease is associated 
^with a high folic acid requirement, Recent reports 
that cyanate inhibits sickling 4 " 12 may imply, as 
proposed by Krebs 13 , a specific dietary basis. The 
purpose of this study is to examine a reciprocal 
correlation between the occurrence of sickle cell 
anemia and the thiocyanate yield of African and 
American diets, which suggests the hypothesis that 
sickle cell anemia may be a genetically determined 
nutritional anemia involving dependence on cya- 
nate precursors. 

Cyanate, thiocyanate and sickling 

Cerami, Manning and Gillette have shown that 
cyanate irreversibly inhibits the sickling of red 
blood cells in v/fro 4 , 5 and extends the life span of 
treated sickle cells to near normal range in vivo 6 J. 
On a scientific basis established by the work of 
Pauling, Ingram, Murayama and Nalbandian, they 
found that cyanate permanently binds with the dis- 
tinctive amino-termiiial valine residues of hemo- 
globin S resulting in a protein with functional prop- 
erties more like those of normal hemoglobin A 5 . 
Others have confirmed its antisickling effects 8 , 9 . 

; Clinical trial of cyanate used orally on sickle 
cell anemia patients was reported by Qillette et 
aL 10 ' 12 at Rockefeller University as finding definite 
hematological improvement and decrease in the 
hemolytic anemia, without serious adverse side ef- 
fect. It was noted however that since the cells inhi- 
bited from sickling will eventually be replaced, 
"this therapy would have to be continued for the 
life of the patient" 11 . 


Live-long dependence on an exogenous chem- 
ical factor for health .would characterize a nutri- 
tional dependency, were the factor or its precursors 
obtainable from the natural diet. For cy&nate, this is 
in fact the case. 

Cyanate is formed as a product of the oxidation' 
of thiocyanate 14 * 16 , which is catalyzed in the eryth- 
rocyte by hemoglobin* 7 . Hence, thiocyanate may 
also be expected to produce clinical benefit in sickle 
cell anemia. 

Indeed, in 1932 Torrance and Schnabel 18 dis- 
covered that thiocyanate (Potassium Sulphocyan- 
ate) promptly and entirely relieved the anemic 
sickle cell crisis after all else had failed. Incredibly 
this remarkable finding, 40 years in advance of cur- 
rent research, was subsequently neglected. The 
fact that the daily dosage of thiocyanate used (500 
mg,) was less than half the daily dosage of sodium 
cyanate (1000-1200 mg.) used by Gillette et al. 11 
suggests that thiocyanate has at least a similar de- 
gree of efficacy in the disease as cyanate. 

The direct power of thiocyanate ion to prevent 
sickling has been proposed by Pauling 19 on the v 
basis that it rivals urea as a hydrogen bond breaking 
agent, and thus shares the rationale for urea 
therapy 2( Un preventing sickle ceir crises. 

Dietary derivation of thiocyanate 

It is known that thiocyanate ion is physiologi- 
cally present in mammalian fluids 21 , and that it is 
derivable from the beta-cyanogenetic glucosides in 
. food.plahts 22 . Widespread in the vegetable king- 
dom, these were termed nitrilosides and designated 


vitamin Bit by Krebs 23 in light of various reported 
physiological functions 24 , 25 , including clinically 
observed hematopoietic effects 26 , 27 . 

Nitrilosides, which are considered in them- 
selves nontoxic 22 *" 2 W 9 , form thioeyanate upon 
their hydrolysis in the body, through the action with 
sulfur of the enzyme rhodanese 30 which is found in 
all normal body tissues 31 . A similar enzymatic con- 
version can occur in plants, with a sometimes sub- 
stantial development of preformed thiocyanates 32 . 

Clinical administration of the nitriloside amyg- 
dalin thus fosters a rise in thioeyanate in the body 
fluids 33 , 34 . Thioeyanate levels many* times that of 
controls have been found in the serum of animals 
feeding on nitrilosidic grasses 35 . High plasma levels 
of thioeyanate are produced in rats 36 and in 
humans 37 -* 9 by cassava, a tropical food plant rich in 
both nitriloside and thiocyaiiate 40 . Wide fluctua- 
tions in the thioeyanate metabolic pool result from 
such influences 22 . 

Will regularly occurring high blood levels of 
cyanate and thioeyanate from dietary precursors 
irreversibly inhibit the sickling of red blood cells 
and thereby prevent the general manifestation of 
sickle cell anemia? If so, we should expect rare or 
miljd occurrence of the disease is susceptible popu- 
lations on thiocyanate-yfelding diets, and its full 
homozygous occurrence and morbidity only in 
populations whose diets are devoid of significant 
fhiocyanate sources. Further, we should expect 
some correlation between dietary • dosages and 
those found clinically useful. 


Thiocyanate yield of African and U.S. diets 

Food production figures 41 indicate that 80% of 
the tropical African diet may consist of 
thiocyanate-yielding foods. The main staples of 
sub-Sahara Africa are cassava, yams (Dioscorea 
sp.), and sorghum and millet grains 41 ., Nitrilosidic 
beans are also eaten. 

Sorghum and millet contain (up to 0.5%) the 
nitriloside dhurrin, and cassava is a comparable,, 
though variable, source of the nitriloside linamarin ^ 
(phaseolunatin) 2 - 2 . Both nitrilosldes can produce an 
amount of thiocyanate equivalent to l/5th their 
weight, or twice their HCN component 24 . 

In addition, linamarin yields acetone and dhur- 
rin yields an isomer of salicylic acid 23 , which may 
be acetylated by, for example, acetic acid formed 
from the reaction of HCN with hydrochloric acid in 
the stomach 32 . This signifies additional antisickling 
potential in view of a report 42 that acetylsalicylic 
acid, or aspirin, can increase the oxygen affinity of 
sickle cell hemoglobin in vitro to a level at which 
sickling is generally inhibited, and retards the for- 
mation of prostaglandin which induces sickling. 

The common practice of prolonged soaking 
and fermentation of cassava considerably dissi- 
pates its nitriloside content, although this may be 
compensated in part by the addition of sugar in 
some preparations which, with enzymes and al- 
dehydes of the plant, can cuase free HCN to disap- 
pear with the formation of glucocyanohydrin 40 . 
Some.cyanogenetic glucoside may survive all 
methods of preparation 40 , but highest levels would 


occur in dry, unfermented, bitter varieties of cas- 
sava which are eaten in some rural areas 37 , 43 , 44 . 

Traces of HCN in cassava, arising from the 
premature catabolism of linamarin in the bruised 
plant, would be detoxified in the body to both 
thiocyanate and cyanate 45 . The safety of the intact 
nitriloside per se consists in the functional prepon- 
derance in the body of the NCH-detoxifying en- 
zyme rhodanese oyer the hydrolyzing enzyme 
beta-glycosidase 27 , 30 . 

In addition, cassava in many forms may be a 
rich source of preformed thiocyanate. Oke 32 , 40 in 
Nigeria reports that compared With a thiocyanate 
range in other vegetables of 0.4-4. 1 mg%, a figure of 
60.0 mg% was obtained for 'gari,' a traditional na- 
tive food made by fermentation of cassava, and 
70.0-80.0 mg% for cassava flour, also, 50.0-60.0 
mg% for yam flour, which too is widely used in 
Africa. With its additional ,60% water content, a 200 
g yam may contain 40 mg of thiocyanate. 

One kilogram of such foodstuffs per day 41 

36 44 

could thus provide the native African with up to a 
gram of thiocyanate. This is the oral dosage level 
found successful in sickle cell anemia m the Rock- 
efeller University clinical trial of cyanate 11 , and is 
twice the dosage of thiocyanate successfully; used 
to resolve sickle cell crises by^ Torrance and 
-Schnabel 18 . 

lit comparison, the American diet lacks sig- 
nificant nitriloside sources 24 . It also appears to lack 
substantial sources of preformed thiocyanate. 
Yams might be an exception, however these are 
only occasionally eaten. Among common vegeta- 


bles the highest thiocyanate levels are found in the , 
cabbage family (Brassica): 0.7-10.2 mg per 100 g of 
fresh material; while milk may provide 2-8 mgper 
quart 46 . It is reasonable to assume that the Ameri- 
can black, even if he ate half a pound of cabbage a 
day and could drink a quart of milk, would generally 
not obtain more than 25 mg of thiocyanate from his 
daily diet ," or about l/40th the estimated maximum 
African intake. 

The American black population may thus be 
regarded as controls for an African population un- 
dergoing continuous cyanate "treatment, in an im- 
mense natural experiment. What were the as- 
sociated results? 

Sickle cell anemia in the U.S., 
Africa and the West Indies 

Raper 47 concluded that while sickle cell 
anemia occurs in 1 in about 50 sickters in the U.S., 
its incidence is less than 1 in 1000 sicklers in Africa. 
The clinical impression is not only that sickle cell 
anemia is rare in Africa compared with America, 
but also that morbid features of the disease are 
probably less common in Africa. This is in spite of 
the fact that, probably due to naturalselection for 
the malaria resistance conferred by the gene 48 , the 
incidence of sickle cell trait over tropical Africa is 
nearly three time& as high as in U.S., blacks. 

Sickle cell trait, the relatively benign 
heterozygous condition, occurs in up to 10% of the 
22 million blacks in the U.S., of whom sickle cell 
anemia affects nearly 50,000 49 , an incidence fully 
compatible with the mathematically predictable 


genetic occurrence of the homozygous condition 50 
in which the gene is double-dominant. 

By contrast, in Africa sickle cell trait affects up 
to 25% of a susceptible population of yearly 300 
billion blacks 61 . There is a parabolic relationship 
between trait incidence and homozygosity: if the 
frait is 9% there occur 0.2% homozygotes, but if the 
trait is 25% there occur 1.6%, or 8 times as many 
homozygotes 52 . The African population repre- 
sents, therefore, the birth of several million 
homozygotes from the union of trait carriers. 

Yet in the entire quarter century of 1925-1950, 
less than 100 bases of sickle cell anemia had been 
recorded in Africa for all ages 47 . Not a single case 
was recorded in Nigeria until 1952 53 . 

Neel 54 , noting the paucity of case reports of 
this disease from Africa, has questioned whether 
the results of homozygosity for the gene were the 
s.ame in Africa as in the U.S. Yet he found in the 
U.Snio apparent correlation between such results 
and the amount of Caucasian admixture. 

The evidence thus suggests the existence in 
Africa of an inhibiting environmental factor on the 
clinical manifestation of the disease. An unknown 
''protective factor" was in fact postulated to ac- 
count fpr the rarity of .sickle cell anemia in South 
and East Africa 55 . In this regard it is significant that 
the homozygous sickle cell condition, which is the 
genetic basis for the anemia, has been reported 
occurring in an Asymptomatic form in African 
adults 56 " 59 . This would make general detection dif- 
ficult indeed, and indicates thev involvement of 
some non-genetic factor. 


Motulsky 50 , recognizing the very low preval- 
ence of sickle cell anemia in underdeveloped areas 
of Africa, attributes this to the death of most pa- 
tients in early infancy. From his experience in 
Uganda, Lehmann 56 doubted this view on the 
grounds that "even if they had died in early infancy, 
it would have been such a 'slaughter of the inno- 
cents ' that it could not have escaped pur attention. ' ' 

In severely malnourished areas of the central 
Congo it was reported that the majority of sickle 
cell homozygotes succumb before the age of 
tyvo 48 , 52 , a finding some geneticists quickly 
generalized. 6ut in Rhodesia the average onset of 
the disease is not until the age of nearly six, a year 
Tater thafi in the better fed U.S., and its clinical 
appearance is both infrequent and relatively mild 60 . 
The Rhodesian patients demonstrated greater re- 
sistance to malaria than normal individuals or those 
with sickle cell trait. A factor moderating the sever- 
ity of sickle cell disease thus seems to occur in 
infancy beyond the age of 6 months, before which 
the infant is protected by fetal hemoglobin 61 . 

In Rhodesia, Uganda, and East Africa, millet 
porridge, rich in nitriloside, is the standard weaning 
food, commencing at age 6 months 62 . In West Af- 
rica, the weaning food is cornmeal porridge, start- 
ing later 62 . Thomas 63 in West Africa, reports that 
almost 40% of the infants receive no milk or fish up 
to the age of two years, and that in some regions 
cassava and yams are seldom given to infants. Thus 
they may lack the postulated protection of dietary 
sources "of thiocyanate, and lack also the sulfur- 
containing amino acids, which are involved in its 


formation and conservation 32 . This may explain the 
occurrence of sickle cell anemia in infants in some 
areas of West Africa 64 , and its mitigation and rarity 
in later age groups 58 , 65 , 66 , when the normal cas- 
sava, yam and millet dietary pattern is in effect. 

As is well-known," sickle cell anemia is rela- 
tively benign in the West Indies 67 . Those with the ^ 
homozygous condition are found living to elderly 
ages in Jamaica, and often deny ever having experi- 
enced serious crises. The Jamaican diet is rich in 
folic acid. 67 , and here too cassava and yams are 
staples 68 . N - 

Electrophoretic evidence 

Although overall infant mortality, affecting all 
genotypes, is much higher in Africa, than in the 
U.S., conventional electrophoretic analyses of 
blood specimens of infant and adult populations 
indicate that the African sickle cell homozygotes 
have the same 20-35% survival to adulthood as to 
the American homozygotes 48 , 69 . Since the gene is 
more frequent, this means there must be many more 
of them as a proportion of the adult population than 
in America, yet the clinical disease is much rarer in 
African adults 47 . New evidence suggests that the 
electrophoretic method on which such survival es- 
timates are based may have considerably undere- 
stimated the situation in Africa, and accords with 
the~bbservations of Konotey-Ahulu 70 in Ghana that 
the survival of the sickle cell homozygote may be a^ 
major factor explaining the high incidence of the 
gene in Africa. 


. Cyanate is capable of increasing the elec- 
trophoretic mobility of hemoglobin S, by conferring 
extra negative charges to the molecules 71 . Elec- 
trophoretic analysis of hemoglpbin S treated by 
cyanate and a precursor shows an additional frac- 
tion with the faster mobility of hemoglobin A 72 . 
Hence, dietary availability of cyanate precursors 
may have masked many adult African sickle cell 
homozygotes (Hb SS) as heterozygotes (Hb AS or 
a variant) in electrophoretic studies. 

Indirect evidence for such masking would in- 
clude the mysterious increase, in excess of com- 
parative viability, of 'heterozygotes* in later Afri- 
can age groups on electrophoresis, which parallels 
the per cent decrease of sickle homozygotes in such 
studies 69 , and the/ virtually total absence of both 
clinical sickle cell anenjia and the electrophoretic 
Hb SS patterns in all ages in rural tribes of Uganda 
showing the highest trait frequencies (40%), where 
x the homozygote incidence for the gene must be 20 
times that of blacks in the U.S. 66 , 73 . 

Wells and Itano 74 speculated that diet may in- 
fluence variations observed in the electrophoretic 
patterns of sickle cell diseased It is pertinent that 
such rural tribes and older Africans would be more 
likely to adhere to native diets rich in cyanate pre- 
cursors, using less processed, bitter forms of cas- 
sava higher in nitriloside, than would younger and 
more urbanized Africans 37 , 43 , 44 . ' 

Cancer in African and American blacks 

One of the great epidemiological mysteries of 
Africa is the raritjrand decrease of Cancer in later 


age groups 75 " 77 , quite contrary to the experience in 
the U.S. where cancer incidence increases with 
advancing age and cancer mortality is 1 8%Tiigher in 
blacks than in whites 7 *. 

The standardized, age-adjusted cancer rate of 
Uganda is one third that of blacks in the U.S. 76 . 
Surprisingly, from age 45 to 75 when spontaneous 
cancer shows its enormous increase, rising in 
American black women from an annual incidence .. 
of 543 to 1170 per 100,000, it decreases in rural 
Ugandan women from 223 to 41 per 100,000 — less 
than l/20th the American rate (pre- 1960 figures) 76 . 
Similarly, the elderly population of Ibadon, Nigeria 
has 1/1 0th the cancer rate of blacks of the same age 
in Ne^ York 77 . As Daviess a/. 76 have observed, 
this phenomenon is of great significance to cancer 
research, for it indicates that there is not a neces- 
sary assbciatiori between cancer and the biological 
effect of aging. 

In this connection Schweitzer 79 has written 
that for several decades his hospital at Lamberene 
in Gabon did not see a single case of cancer among 
the cassava-eating native tribes, and he believed its 
"subsequent occurrence to be due to the substitution 
of European canned and refined foods. Ohsawa 80 
observed at Lamberene that cassava: (manioc) 
comprised 80-90% of the original native diet, and.' 
that the wild manioc was eaten, the rest of the diet 
consisting of bitter green bananas and wild herbs, , 
with little meat. 
_ The rarity of cancer in-these groups with rela- 
tively high nitriloside diets is of interest in view of 
the reported demonstrations of nitriloside as an 


anti-cancer agent 23 , 81 in cell culture 28 , 82 , 
animals 83 , 84 , and human patients 26 , 27 , 33 , 34 , 82 , and 
as a dietary correlate in cancer-free animal and 
human populations 24 , 33 . 

Rheumatoid, disease in Africa and the U.S. 

Krebs 23 , who related nitriloside deficiency to 
the etiology of neoplasia^ has proposed that the 
alleviation of rheumatoid disease by salicylates 
may have a preventive, nutritional counterpart in 
the derivability of such compounds from the 
metabolism of dietary nitrilosides (vitamin B17). 

Whereas rheumatoid disease afflicts over ten 
million individuals in the U.S., incapacitating one 
million, very few cases have been reported 1 among 
the larger population of tropical Africa, a rarity 
which has defied explanation 85 . Significantly, a 
salicylic acid isomer is nutritionally available from 
the nitriloside dhurrin in millet and sorghum 
grains 23 , which are staples ia West Africa and 
throughout tropical Africa 41 , 63 . This may account 
for the extreme rarity of acute rheumatism in the 
Gold Coast 86 and the uncommon occurrence of 
rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis throughout 
the African tropics 87 . It may also contribute to the 
alleviation of sickle cell anemia in these areas, in 
view of laboratory 42 and clinical 88 evidence- for a 
beneficial effect of aspirin in sickle cell disease,, 
although aspirin has often failed to relieve the pain 
of sickle cell crisis 86 . - 


The formation of several promising antisickl- 
ing agents — cyanate, thiocyanate, and aspirin- 


related compounds — as metabolic products of vi- 
tamin Bi? (nitriloside) amplifies the probability that 
it is the root protective factor for carriers of the 
sickle cell gene, homozygotes and also heterozy- 
gotes, who may be affected in stress conditions 51 . 
Subsidiary mechanisms of action are thus t6 be 
expected. For example, the formation of 
methemoglobin in the generation of cyanate from 
thiocyanate which occurs in the red blood cell 17 
may reduce the concentration of hemoglobin capa- 
ble of sickling withiii the cell. Clinical induction of 
methemoglobin for this purpose was found to in- 
hibit sickling and prolong red cell survival, although 
the inducing agents used had unacceptable 
properties 89 . 

Since clinical and dietary dosages are compar- 
able, clinical amelioration of sickle cell anemia by 
cyanate 10 " 12 and by thiocyanate 18 must logically 
represent protective effects of thiocyanate-yielding 
native diets ip parts of Africa arid the West Indies 
where the disease is generally rare or mild. Its full 
homozygous occurrence in blacks in the U.S., 
where the diet yields little thiocyanate, may repre- 
sent therefore an unrelieved nutritional dependency 
on cyanate precursors, in association with which 
sickle cell genes must have evolved in their ances- 
tral tropical habitat. It follows that sickle cell 
anemia may constitute a genetically determined ^ 
nutritional deficiency disease, involving a depen- 
dency on thiocyanate and its precursors, the ni- 

This hypothesis would predict clinical value of 



nitriloside (Laetrile) and thiocyanate-yielding diets 
in the treatment of sickle cell anemia. 

The association in Africa between rarity of 
neoplastic and rheumatoid diseases and elevated 
levels of dietary nitrilosides suggests, in light of the 
therapeutic applications of the vitamin and its 
metabolites, the potential usefulness of nitriloside- 
containing foods or supplements to block the age- 
associated increase of spontaneous cancer and 
rheumatoid disease, as well as the occurrence of 
sickle cell anemia, in other populations. 



fierce, L. F., Rath, C.F. "Evidence for folic acid deficiency in the 
genesis of anemic sickle cell crisis." Blood, 1962, 20, 19. 

2 Lindenbaum, J. "Folic acid deficiency in sickle cell anemia." New 
Engl. J. Med., 1963, 269, 875.. 

3 Watson-Williams, E.J. "Role of folic acid in the treatment of sickle 
cell disease," in Abnormal Haemoglobins in Africa (edited by J. Jon- 
xis); p. 435. Davis, Philadelphia, 1965. 

4 Cerami, A., Manning, J. M.' "Potassium cyanate as an inhibitor of the 
sickling of erythrocytes in vitro.? Proc.natn. A cad. Sci. U.SA., 1971, 
68 7 \m. 

5 Manning, J. M., Cerami, A., Gillette, P. N., deFuria, F.G., Miller, 
D. R. "Chemical and biological aspects of the inhibition of red blood 
cell sickling by cyanate." Adv. exp. Med. Biol., 1972, 28, 253. 

6 Gillette, P. N., Manning, J. M., Cerami A. "Increased survival of 
sickle cell erythrocytes after treatment in vitro with sodium cyanate." 
Proc. natn. Acad. Sci. U.S. A., 1971, 68, 2791. 

7 Cerami, A. "Cyanate as an inhibitor of red-cell sickling." New Engl. 
J. Med., 1972, 287, 807. 

8 May, A., Bellingham, A. J., Huehna, E. R. "Effects of cyanate on 
sickling." Lancet, 1972,/, 658. 

9 Segal, G. B., Feig, S. A., Metzer, W. C, McCaffrey, R. P. "Effects 
of urea and cyanate on sickling in vitro." New Engl. J. Med., 1972,287, 

10 Gillette , P. N., Peterson, C. M., Manning, J. M., Cerai, A. "De- 
crease in the hemolytic anemia o£ sickle cell disease after administra- 
tion of sodium cyanate." J. clin. Inv., 1972, 51, 36a. 

11 Gillette, P. N., Peterson, CM., Manning, J. M., Cerami, A. "Pre- 
liminary clinical triais~with cyanate." Adv. exp. Med. Biol., 1972, 28, 


12 Cerairti, A., Manning, J. M., Gillettep, P. N., de Furia, F., Miller, 
D. Gradiano, J. H., Peterson, C. M.. "Effect of cyanate on red blood 
cell sickling." Fed. Proc, 1973,32, 1668. 

13 Krebs, E. T., Jr. Personal communications, 1972. 

14 Wilson, I, R., Harris, G. M, "Oxidation of thiocyanate ion by 
hydrogen peroxide. 1. The pH-independent reaction," J. Am. chem. 
Soc. y 1960, S2, 4515. * 

15 Oram, J. D., Reiter, Br "The inhibition of streptococci by lac- 
toperoxidase, thiocyanate, and hydrogen peroxide." Biochem. J., 
1966, 100, 382^ 

16 Chung. J., Wood, J. L. "Oxidation of thiocyanate to cyanide and 
sulfate by- the lactopersoxidase-hydFOgen peroxide system." Arch. 
Biochem. Biophys., 1970, 141, 73. 

17 Chung, J., Wood, J. L. "Oxidation of thiocyanate to cyanide 
catalyzed by hemoglobin." J. biol. Chem., 1971,246, 555. 

18 Torrance, E. G., Schnabel, T. G. "Potassium Sulphocyanate: a note 
on its use for the painful crises in sickle cell anemia." Ann. intern. 
Med,, 1932, 6, 782. 

19 Pauling, L. Personal communicagion, 1973. 

20 Nalbandian, R. M., Murayama, M. Sickle Cell Hemoglobin: 
Molecule to Man; p. 133. Little, Brown, Boston, 1973. ^ 

"Funderburk, C. P., Van Middlesworth, L. "Effect-of thiocyanate 
concentration on thiocyanate distribution and excretion." Proc. Soc. 
exp. Biol. Med., 1971, 136, 149. 

"Montgomery, R. t>. "Cyanogens," in Toxic Constituents of Plant 
Foodstuffs (edited by K. Liener): p. 143. Academic Press, New York, 

23 Krebs, E. T., Jr. "The nitrilosides (vitamin Bit): their nature, oc- 
currence, and metabolic significance. Antineoplastic vitamin Bit." J. 
appl.Nuir., 1970,22, 75. 

24 Krebs, E. T/, Jr; "The nitrilosides in plants and animals: nutritional 
and therapeutic implications," in The Laetriles — Nitrilosides — in the 
Prevention and Control of Cancer; p. 1 . McNaughton Foundation, 
Montreal, 1967. 


25 De Long, E. W. * 'Neglected natural plant factors: the beta- 
cyanogenetic glucosides. Intestinal flora >and the role of the 
B-cyanogenetic glucosides. " J. appl. Nutr., 1955, 8, 343, 356. / 

26 MoVrone, J. A. "Chemotherapy of inoperable cancer: preliminary 
report of 10 cases treated with Laetrile/' Exp. Med. Surg., 1962, 20, 

27 Krebs, E. T., Jr., Bouziane, N. R. "Nitrilosides (Laetriles): their 
rational and clinical utilization in human cancer," in The Laetriles — 
Nitrilosides — in the Prevention and Control of Cancer; p. 49. 
McNaughton Foundation, Montreal, 1967. , 

2 ?Burk, C, McNaughton, A. R. L.* von Ardenne, *M. "Hyperttiermy 
of cancer cells with, amygdalin-glucosidase and synergistic action of 
derived cyanide and benzaldehyde," Minerva Chirurgicd, 1969, 24, 

29 Dispensatory of the United States (1960 edition); p. 44. 

30 . Sumner, J. B., Somers, F.'G. Chemistry andMethods of Enzymes; 
p. 98. Academic Press, New York, 1947. 

31 Rosenthal,0. "Distribution of rhodanese.' r Fed. Proc, 1948,7, 181. 

32 Oke, O. L. "The role of hydrocyanic acid in nutrition. " WorldRev. 
Nutr. Diet., 1969, //, 170. 

33 Nieper, H. A. "Problems of early cancer diagnosis and therapy: I. 
Nitrilosides, particularly amygdalin, in cancer prophylaxis and 
therapy." Agressologie, 1970,//, 1. 

34 Navarro, M. D. "Laetrile therapy in cancer/.' Philippine J. Cancer, 
1962,4; 204. 

35 Flux, D. S., Butler, G. W., Johnson, J. M., Glenday, A. C, Peter- 
son, G. B. "Goitrogenic effects of white clover. HJV<?w> Zealand J. Sci. 
Tech., 1956,55, 88. 

36 Osuntokun, B. O. "Cassava diet and cyanide metabolism in rats." 
Brit., J. Nutr., 1970, 24, 797. . 

37 Monekosso, G. L., Wilson, J. "Plasma thiocyanate and vitamin B12 
metabolism in Nigerian patients with neurologocal diseases.' ' Lancet, 
1966, /, 1062, 


38 Delange, F., Ermans, A. M. "Role of a dietary goitrogen in the 
etiology of endemic goiter on Idj^i Island." Am. J, din. Nutr., 19*71 , 
, 24, 1354. 

39 Osuntokun, B. O., Durowoju, Jl E., McFarlane, H., Wilson, J. 
"Plasma amino-acids in the Nigerian Ataxic Neuropathy. 1 " Brit. med. 
J., 1968, 3, 647. 

40 Oke, O. L. "Cassava as food in Nigeria." World Rev. Nutr. Diet., 
1968, 9, 227. 

^Oke, O. L. "A nutrition policy for Nigeria." World Rev. Nutr. Diet., 
1972, 14, 1. 

42 Klotz, I. M.^Tam, J. W. O. "Acetylation of sickle cell hemoglobin 
by aspirin." Proc. natn. Acad. Sd.-U.SA., 1973, 70, 1313. 

43 Ekpechi, O. L. , Dimitriadou, A. , Fraser, R. 4 Goitrogenic activity of 
cassava (a staple Nigerian food)." Nature, 1966, 2, 1 138. 

44 Osuntokun, B. O. "An ataxicneuropathy in Nigeria." Brain, 1968, 
91, 215. 

45 Williams, R. T. Detoxification Mechanisms; p. 391. Wiley, New 
York, 1959. 

46 Van Etten, C. H. "Goitrogens," in Toxic Constituents -of Plant 
Foodstuffs" (edited by I. Liener); pp. 1 17, 121. Academic Press, New 
York, 1969. 

47 Raper, A. B. "Sickle-cell disease in Africa and America: a compari- 
son." J. trop. Med. Hyg., 1950, 53, 49. 

48 Neel, J^ V. "Genetics of human hemoglobin differences." Ann. 
hum. Genet., 1956,2/, 1. 

49 Scott, R. B. "Health care priority and sickle cell anemia." 
J.A.M.A., 1970,2/4, 731. 

&0 Motulsky, A. G. "Frequency of sickling disorders in U.S. Blacks." 
New Engl. J. Med., 1973, 288, 31. 

51 Bernstein, R. E. "Mass screens for sickle cell disease." J A.M. A., 
1973, 223, 438. 


52 Lambotte, C. "Sickle-cell anemia," in .Disease of Children in the 
Subtropics and Tropics (edited by D. B. Jelliffe); p. 531. Arnold, 
London; 1970. 

a3 Jelliffe, D. B. "Sickle-cell disease." Trans. Roy. Soc. trop. Med. 
Hyg., 1952,46, 16$. 

&4 Neel , J . V . * * Data pertaining to the population dynamics of sickle cell 
disease." Am. J. hum. Genet, , 1953, 5; 154. 

&& Song, J. Pathology of Sickle Cell Disease, p. 95. Thomas, Spring- 
field, 111., 1971, 

56 Edington, G. M., Lehmann, H* "Expression of the sickle-cell gene 
in Africa," Brit. med. J., 1955, /, 1308. 

57 Jacob, G. F. "A study of the survival rate of cases of sickle-cell 
anemia." Brit. med. J., 1957, /, 738. 

58 Konotey-Ahulu, F. I. D ? , Ringelhann, B. "Sickle-cell anemia, 
sickle-cell thalassaemia, sickle-cell haemoglobin C thalassaemia in one 
Ghanaian family." Brit. med. J., 1969, /, (507. 

59 Watson- Williams, E. J.,- Weatherall, D. J. "The laboratory charac- 
terization of human haemoglobin variants," in Abnormal Haemoglo- 
bins in Africa (edited by J. Jonxis); p. 99. Davis, Philadelphia, 1965. 

60 Bell, R. M. S., Gelfand, M. "Sickle cell disease in Rhodesia." J. 
trop. Med. Hyg., 1971, 74, 148. 

61 Song, J. Pathology of Sickle Cell Disease, p. 37. Thomas, Spring- 
field, 111., 1971. 

62 Swaminathan, M. "The nutrition and feeding of infants and pre- 
school children in the developing countries." World Rev. Nutr. Diet., 
1968, 9, #5. 

63 Thomas, H. M. "Some aspects of food, and nutrition in Sierra 
Leone." World Rev. Nutr. Diet., 1972, 14,' 4S. ~" 

64 Mabayoje, J. O. "Sickle-cell anaemia." Brit. med. J., 1956 , /, 194. 

65 Lehmann, H. "Sickle-cell anaemia." Brit. med. J., 1953, 2, 1217. 

66 Lehmann, H. "Sickle-cell' anaemia and sickle-cell trait as homo- and 
heterozygous gene-combinations." Nature, 1951, 167, 931. 


"Serjeant, G. R., Richards, R., Barbor, P. R. H., Milner, P. F., 
"Relatively benign sickle-cell anaemia in 60 patients over 30 in the 
West Indies." Brit. med. J., 1968, 3, 86. 

68 Montgomery, R. D., Cruikshank, E. K., Robertson, W. B., 
McMenemey, W. H. "Clinical and pathological observations on 
Jamaican neuropathy." Brain, WW, 87, 27. 

89 AUison, A. C. "Notes on sickle-cell polymorphism." Ann. t hum. 
Genet., 1954, 19, 39. 

70 Konotey-Ahulu, F. I. D. "Maintenance of high sickling rate in 
Africa — role of polygamy." J. trop. Med. Hyg., 1970, 73, 19. 


71 Pacheco, J., Melvin, M., Gabuzda,T. "Carbamylation of individual 
.globin subunits by 14C-cyanate." Clin. Res., 1972, 20, 471. 

72 Kraus, L. M., Rasad, A., Kraus, A. P. "Carbamyl phosphate mod- 
ification of hemoglobin S structure resulting in altered sickling." Adv. 
exp. Med. Biol., 1972, 28, ^53. 

73 Lehmann, H., Raper, A. B. "Maintenance of high sickling rate in an 
African community." Brit. med. J., 1956, 2, 333. 

74 Wells, I. C, Itano, H. A. "Ratio of sickle-cell anemia hemoglobin to 
normal hemoglobin in sickle mics."/. biol. Chern., 1051, 188, 65. 

7& Edington, G. M., Gilles, H. M. Pathology in the Tropics; p. 580. 
Arnold, London, 1969. 

76 Davies, J. N. P., Wilson, B. A., Knowelden, J. "Cancer incidence of 
the African population of Kyadondo (Uganda)." Lancet, 1962, 2, 328. 

77 Edington, G. M., Hendrickse, M. "Incidence and frequency of 
lymphoreticular tumors in Ibadan arid the Western State of Nigeria." 
J. natl. Cancer Inst., 1973,50, 1623. 

78 Fontaine, S. A., Henschke, U. K., Leffall, L. D., Jr., et al. "Com- 
parison of the cancer deaths in the black and white U.S.A. population 
from 1949 to 1967." Med. Ann. D.C., 1972, 41, "293. 

79 Schweitzer, A. "How the white man's diet affects natives of Af- 
rica," in A Cancer Therapy (by M. Gerson); pp. 158-159. Dura Books, 
New York, 1958. 

80 Ohsawa, G. Cancer and the Philosophy of the Far East; pp.. 8-10. 
Swan House, Binghamton, N.Y., 1971. 


81 Reitnaur, P.G, "Amygdalic acid glycoside in cancer research and 
cancer therapy.* • Arzneim. Forsch;, 1972,22, 1347. ^ 

8a Rossi, B., Guidetti, E., Dekkers, C. "Clinical trial of 
chemotherapeutic treatment of advanced cancers with 
l T mandelonitrile-beta-digiuco$ide," in The Laetriles — Nitrilosides — 
in the Prevention and Control of Cancer; p. 81 . McNaughton Founda- 
tion, Montreal, 1967. 

83 McNaughton Foundation FDA — Investigative-New Drug Applica- 
tion 6734, Amygdalin (Laetrile), 1970; pp. 247-248, 00080-00093. 

84 Burk, D. Unpublished observations, June, 1973. 

85 Felsenfeld. O. Synopsis of Clinical Tropical Medicine ;p«-26. Mosby, 
St.touis, 1965. 

86 Edington, G. M. "Sickle-cell diseases in the Accra district of the 
Gold Coast/' Brit, med. J., 1953, 2, 957. - - 

87 Edington, G. M., Gilles, H. M. Pathology in the Tropics; p. 595. 
Arnold, London, 1969. 

88 Ndugwa, C. M., Kanyike, F. B. "Analysis of patients attending 
sicjde cell anaemia clinic, New Mulago Hospital, 1970;- 1971." East 
African med. 7., 1973, 50, 189. 

89 Beutler, E. "The effectof niethemoglobin formation in sickle cell 
disease." J. din. Invest., 1961,40, 1856. 



Abbott Laboratories 250 

Abkhasians 69,193 

Acheson, Dean ; ". 399 

Alba Pharmaceutical 251 

Alcoa 250, 256, 287, 288 

Aldrich, Nelson 250, 397 

Aldrich, Winthrop 350 

Alien Property custodian 


Allied Chemical 249, 341 

Almonds 124, 443 

Ambruster, Howard . 247, 283, 406 
Ameriqan Cancer Society . . 18, 45, 
60, 129, 130, 146, 147, 152, *170, 
171, 175, 185 - 196, 200, 205, 209, 
221, 223, 228, 230, 23.1, 235, 242, 
366, 367, 428, 432, 479 - 481, 490. 

American Home Products 342 

American I.G- Chemical Corp 

y 250, 252, 256, 301 - 308, 312, 313. 

American Medical Assoc . . : 18, 21 


242, 359, 372 - 374, 382, 383, 394, 


Amygdalin 38, 42, 98, 

116, 123, 124, 125, 132, 133, 149, 
163, 428, 462, 465, 467 

Anaconda 250, 341 

Antrol Laboratories 251 

Aprikern 44 L 442, 444, 457 

Apricot Kernels .'.52,154, 59, 62-65, 

113, 116-122, 127,136, 140,421, 


Apricot Oil 63, 64, 65 

Archbald, John ? . . ., 370 

Armour & Go 341 

Aspirin 126, 196,434, 

Association of American Physicians* 

& Surgeons 487 

Atlantic Oil 250 

ATT 341 

Auschwitz 282, 284 

Baehr, Dr. George .... 349 

J. T. Baker Chemical Co. . ; . . , 250 

Banik, Dr. Allen £ < 62, 65 

Bastiat, Frederic 410 

Bausch and Lomb 289 

Bayer Co. 250, 278,301, 


BCG Vaccine ' 91, 92, 93, 21 f 

Beard, Prof. John 79, 85, 

_ 89,93,98,102,211 

Behn, Colonel f .. . 295, 296 

Beisler, Dr. Simon A -448 

Bell and Howell 250 

Benzaldehyde 102, 103, 105, 

107, 108, 111, 118, 149,248 

Berglas, Alexander 71 

Beri-Beri , 53 

Beta-Glucuronidase ... 85, 105, 106 

Beta-glucosidase 103, 105 

118, 126, 149 

Bethlehem Steel 341 

Bismarck 274, 279, 487, 488 

Black, Eugene 263, 341, 397 

Blyth&Co 314^ 323, 336 

Borden Company 250, 358 

Bosch, Dr. Carl 256, 278, 


Botelho, Joe 155, 156 

Bouziane, Dr. N. R 131 

Breck, Inc x . 251 

Briggs, Dr. George M 56 

Bristol Meyers 251, 301 

Brown, Helene 17, 95, 129, 195, 196 

Buchenwald 282, 284 

Budd, Dr. John W 33 

Bullitt, C. William 303 

Bulova Watch Co 341 

Burk, Dr. Dean 38, 39, 

42-46, 115, 117, 124, 127, 135, 
146 - 150, 166, 190, 200 

Burkitt, Dr. Dennis P 55, 56 

Butt, Bruce 435 

Buttons, Alicia y. . . 156, 157 

Buttons, Red '. 156 

Calif. Dept. of Public Health . . .31, 

33, 113, 115, 126, 145, 166, 171, 

190, 191, 428, 452 

Cancer Throughout 

Cancer Commission, Calif. Medical 

Assoc, (and its 1953 report) 

24 - 37, 105 

Capitalism . . .266, 271-277, 331, 500 

Carcinogens . . 72, 76, 82, 110, 180, 


Cardinal Laboratories 251 

Carnation Co 250 

Carnegie, Andrew 350, 316, 

369, 372, 373, 375, 398 

Carnegie Foundations . v 354 

372 - 375, 398, 399 

Cartels Throughout Part II 

Carter, Richard . .359, 367, 384, 397 

Carder, Jacques 48, 49 

Centaur Co 310 

Chase Manhattan Bank 335, 

336, 341, 342, 397, 501 



Chase National Bank 335, 

- 350, 358, 397 

Chemotherapy ... Throughout 

Particularly 195^221 

Chef-Boy-Ar-Dee Foods 251 

China Medical Board 378 

Chloramphenicol ..... .... 407 

Cholesterol 92, 142, 402, 404 

Chorionepithelioma . .-. 85, 

164, 165, 177 
Chorionic Gonadotrophs Hormone 

(CGH) 85,86, 188 

Christian Scientists ; . 399 

Chymotrypsin ............ 90, 1L0 

CIA 264,316,398 

Ciba Pharmaceutical Co . . 250, 408 
Cigarettes . 27 - 31, 110 

- Clark, Edward T 308, 309 

Commonwealth fund 375 - 378 

Commercial Solvents Corp. ... 341 
Communists, Communism 262, 

267, 268, 270 - 272, 275, 282, 298, 

324, 325, 351, 357, 470, 471, 491, 

500, 508, 509 

Conspiracy : 500 - 507 

Continental Can 341 

Confreres* Dr. Ernesto . . . 43, 160, 

133, 157,232,422,429,430 

Coolidge, Calvin ........'. 308, 359 

Council on Foreign Relations . 359, 
398, 399, 400 v 493 

Cowles Publications 341 

Creole Petroleum 333 

Cummings, Homer 312 

Cyanide ... 32,33, 

102-106,111, 113,116,118, 124, 
145, 149, 162, 443 

Cyclophosphamide 130 

Cytoxin 198 

Daitz, Werner ... 274 

Danner, Dale, Dr , . . 162, 163 

Data Control 341 

Davis, Adelle < • 76, 77 

Davis, Dr. J. N. ." 211,212 

Dean, Dr. H. Trendley . . 446, 447 - 
DeGrio, Margaret 161, 162 

- JDern & Mitchell Laboratories . 251 

DeWitt, J. Doyle 340 

Diethylstilbestrol (DES) 83, 401-404 

Dillon, Douglas .,. . 397 

Dillon, Read~& Co. . 318, 319, 336 

. Dodd, Norman 370 

Dommick & Dominick 336 

Dortza Water 99, 100 ' 

Dow Chemical 250 

Drug, Inc 251.* 301, 309 

Drugs, drug therapy . . Throughout 
Particularly 195-221 

Duisberg; Dr. Karl 278, 280 

Dulles, Allen 315 

Dulles, John Foster 314, 315, 

387, 389, 397, 399 
DuPont . : . . . 250-253, 294, 301, 310 
Eastman Kodak ..... 250, 252, 295 

Edmunds, David 152, 153 

Edsall, Dr. David L 380 

Edwards, Dr. Charles C 417, 


Eisenhower, Dwight . 249, 315, 


Emanuel, Victor 316, 317 

Equitable Insur. Co 340 

Eskimos 67, 68, 219, 233 

Estes, Billie Sol . 508 

Estrogen -. 80-84, 242, 451 

Exxon , ., 333 

Farben (see I.G. Farben) 

Fascists, Fascism 270-280, 470 

Federal Reserve System 257, 


Fehrenbach, T. R 304 

Film Corp 303, 342 

Finpols „ 283, 338, 344, 352, 


Firestone Rubber 250 

First Boston Corp. . . 314, 323, 336 

First Nat'l City Bank 314, 333, 334, 

(See also Nat'l City Bank) 336 

. Jnshbein, Dr. Morris ..... 390, 406 

Fisher, Dr. B 202 

Five Flourouracil (5-FU) 198, 

202, 367, 486 
Flexner, Abraham 372-374, 375, 377 
Flexner, Dr. Simon . . 371-372, 377 
Florida East Coast Railroad ... 341 

Fluoridated water 446-451, 455 

Flynn, John T. 330, 33 1 , 367 

Food and Drug Administration 

Ford, Edsel 256, 291, 292, 295, 303 
Ford Foundation *356, 375-^76, 399 

F^rd; Henry 256, 29 r, 292 

Ford Motor Co. . .,. 250, 256, 

290, - 294, 328, 337, 341 

Forrestal, James 319 

Frederick Stearns & Co. 251 

Fredericks, Dr. Carlton 355 

Free Enterprise 266 - 275, 331, 

Friedman, Milton 522 



Garland, Dr. Henry 26-35 

Garrison, Omar 355, 408, 418 

Garvan, Francis 310 - 313 

Gates, Fred 362 - 365, 

371, 376, 519 
General Analine and Film (GAF) 
303, 313, 316, 318, 322, 342 

General Drug Co 250 

General Dyestuff Corp 308 

General Education Board 

363, 364, 375, 376 

General Hectric 250, 341 

General Foods 341, 354, 355 

General Mills * 250,341 

General Motors 250, 295, 


General Tire .„ 250 

Getty Oil 341 . 

Glidden Paint 250 

Goddard, Dr. James L. . . 453, 454 

Goebbels 360 

Goering, Herman 281 , 291 

Goldman, Sachs, & Co. . . 290, 314 
Good, Dr. 'Robert ... 211, 471, 472 

B. F. Goodrich 341 

Goodyear Rubber 250 

Goulden, Joseph .... 356, 375, 379 
Grasselli Dyestuff & Chemical 

301, 310 

Greenberg, Dr. D. M. . . v 125 

Greenstein, Dr. Jesse P. . 105, 106 

Greif, Wflfried 303, 306 

Greutert, Eduard 248, 304, 305, 323 
Grof, Dr. Stanislav . . 215, 216, 217 

Grashesky, Mrs. Stanley 170 

Guidetti, Dr. Etore 134, 135 

Gulf Oil 250 

Gurchot, Dr. Charles 102 

Also see appendix. 

Hallgarten & Co 290 

Harkness, Edward _.-. 375 

Harriman, Ripley & Co. . . 336 

Hartford' lnsur. Co 340 

Hays, Kaufman & Lindheim . . 3 12 

Hearst Publications 341, 422 

Herter, Christian A. . 371, 372, 399 

Hewlett-Packard Co 341 

Heyden Anti-biotics 251 

Hinsey, Joseph C 376, 377 

Hiroshima 180, 181 

Hiss, Alger 324 \ 

Hitler, Adolph 269, 277-283, 

Hodgkins Disease 158, 160 

Hoffman-LaRoche Laboratories — 

250, 367, 408, 486 

HolsteSd, Dr. Burce 213 

Hoover, Herbert 309, 310, 359,. 399 

Hopgood, David 379 

Hopi Indians 70, 233 

Hopkins, Harry # 366 

Hosmer, Craig .' 439 

Houston, Robert G .' Appendix 

Howard, Frank 253, 254, 294, 

295, 306 

Howard, Harvey 458 

Huchinson, Jay 114 

Humble Oil 333 

Humphrey, Hubert 495, 496 

Hunza, Hunzakuts 61-73, 

119, 151, 193, 233 
Hydrogenation Process . . . 253, 467 

IBM ..:..., 337,341 

I.G. Chemie .... 304, 305, 306, 321 

I.G. Farben Thrpughout Part II 

Ilgner, Max 279, 280, 320 

Imperial Chemical . . . 249, 251, 252 

Interhandel 321 

International Harvester ....... 341 

International Vitamin Corp. ... 251 

Investigation of New Drug (IND) 


ITT 263, 266, 295,296, 297, 


Ivy^ Dr. Andrew 21 - 23, 418, 513 

Jensen Salsberry Laboratories . .751 

John Beard Memorial Foundation 


John Birch Society 470 

Johns Hopkins University 349, 

376, 377, 407 

Johnson, Lyndon 391, 399 

Jones, Dr. Hardin B 8, 175, 

185, 187, 189, 454 
Jones, Dr. Stewart M. . . 18, 82 - 85 

Kahn, Otto 312,313 

Kefauver Amendment 191, 413 

Kell, George * 475 

Kellogg Foundation . . 356, 375, 378 

M. W. Kellogg Co 250 

Kelly, Dr. William 434' 

Kennecott Copper 341 

Kennedy, Edward .-. 489, 490 

Kennedy, John F 440 

Kennedy, Robert 322 

Kettering Foundation ) 399 

Khan, Prince Mohammed Ameen 

63, 64 



Khan, Mir Mohammed Jamel . 114 

Kinsky, Lynn 414, 415 

Kissinger, Henry 399, 501 

-Kraft, Joseph 393, 400 

Krakoff, Dr. Irwin H .190 

Krauch, Carl 256, 281, 290, 291, 294 ' 

Krebiozen 21, 22, 23, 24, 513 

Krebs, Dr. Byron ". . . . 154 

Krebs, Dr. Ernst T., Jr 23, 35 

47, 51 - 53, 64, 70, 89, 94, 98 - 102, 


225, 236, 237, 444, 459-461, 469, 

476, 486, 506, 508, 513 

Krebs, Dr. Ernst T., Sr 99, 100 

Krebs, Richard 282 

Krupp Steel Works .249, 290 , 

Kuhlmann Chemical . . rr. 249 

Kuhn, Loeb, & Co. . 257, 314, 334 

Kuttroff, Adolph . . . . .. .... 303 

Laetrile ~. Throughout 

Lazard Preres ...".... 314 

Leake, Grant 18 

Lederle Laboratories •. , 250 

Lee, Ivy 360,361 

Lehman Bros , . 314 

Leibig, Justus von 123, 247 

Lenin, Nikolai 298 

Leptotaenia Dissecta (Leptonin) 99 

Leukemia T. . . . ^. . . 180, 181 

Levine, Dr. Julius 18 

Levinson, Charles 498^501 

Ley, Dr. Herbert •. 395 

Lie, Trygve 264 

Life Savers, Inc 301 

Liggett, Lewis L 301, 309 

Lilly Foundation 356 

Litton Industries 341 

Livingston, Dr. Virginia .... 91, 92 

Loesser Laboratories 251 

LSD 215,216 

Luminal 405 

Lundbei-jg, Ferdinand 265, 267, 

268, 337, 344, 352, 505 

Lynch, Matthew . . .-. 487 

MacDonald, Dr. Ian 26, 27, 31-35 
MacGregor Instrument Co. . ... 251 

Macy Foundation 375, 378 

Maisin, Dr. Joseph H., Sr 135 

Marijuana 453 

Markle Foundation 378 

Martin, David 25 

Marx, Karl, Marxism .... 275., 499 
Massengill, S, E, Co. .......... 41 1 

Mayo Clinic 203, 450 

McCabe, Charles 479 

McCarrison, Dr. Robt 62-67 

MeCloy, John J 358, 397 

■McCKntock, Earl 301 

McCone, John ^263 

McCoirmack, John W 360, 367, 385 
McNaughton, Andrew . . 40, 41, 43 

Mehl, Dr. John W 32, 33 

Mellon Family ....336.350 

Metropolitan Ins. Co 340, 367 

Metz, Herman 303, 308, 312 , 

Metz Laboratories 250, 308 

Milbank, Albert G 358-359 

. Miller, Joe 391 

Miller, Thomas 312,313,320 

Minute Maid . . : 341 

Mitchell, Charles E. . 257, 302, 305 

Mitchell, John 397 

Mitsui 252, 294 

Mobil Oil 328 

Moerman, Dr. C. ~ 74, 75 

Moertali Dr. Charles 203 

Monsanto Chemical 250 

Moody Foundation ^^ 356 

Morgan, J. P 257, 336, 350 

Mormons 73, 75 

Morrison, Dr. Bayard 38 

Morrone, Dr. John A 135 

Multinationals 261, 265, 327, 


Mussolini, Benito 276, 297 

Nader, Ralph 411,412 

National Cancer Institute . 33, 

36-46, 105, 111, 115, 125, 135, 
146, 148, 150, 190, 191, 200, 201, 
210, 218, 223, 227, 230, 231, 353 

' National City Bank 

(See al§o First Nat'l City Bank) 

National Lead Corp 2$0, 341 

Navajo Indians 70, 233 

Navarro* Dr; Manuel 86,-132 

Nazis, Nazism 74, 270, 276-297, 301, 
315.-325, 345^360, 470, 471, 488 

NBC . v 399*, 430, 431, 474 

Nieper, Dr. Hans .... 43, 130, 157 

Nelson, Gaylord 483>, 

Nestled 250 

New. Drug Application (NDA) 415 
New York Central Railroad ... 341 

Nitriloside 52-54, 

58, 61, 65, 67, 70-72, 76, 98, 100, 

118-122,130,138, 139,242,514 

Nixon, Richard ..... 392, 397, 399, 

400, 439, 490, 491, 496, 497 

Nobel Oil Works 333 



Nuremberg Trials 21, 245, 

278, 282, 283, 291, 320, 309 

NyalCo 251 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA) ... 420 

Old, Dr. Lloyd 469 

Olin Corp 252, 342 

Owl Drug Co 250 

OzalidCorp 251 

Pan American Airways 341 

Pancreas (and its enzymes) 

90-98, 110, 120, 138, 156, 173 
Pangamic Acid (See Vitamin B17) 
Parke-Davis and Co. . 250, 407, 408 

Pasteur Institute 71 , 136 

Patterson, Robert P 318, 319 

Pauling, Dr. Linus Ill - 

Peabody, George 361 

Pellagra . . . .- 17, 50, 53 

Penn Central Railroad 341 

Percy, Charles 64 

Pernicious Anemia 50, 53 

Perry; lsabelle, Dr 148 

Pet Milk Co \ 250 

Peters, Dr. Vera 183, 184 

Phillips Milk of Magnesia 301 

Phillips, Dr. Paul H 448 

Pillsbury, George A 362, 365 

Pittsburg Glass 250 

Polaroid Corp 341 

Poole, Robert 414, 415 

Powers, Dr. William : . . 183 

Pritchett, Henry S. ...... 372, 373 

Proctor and Gamble 250 

Professional Standards Review 

Organization (PSRO) 

392, 393, 420, 438 

Proxmire, William 453 ^ 

Pure Ofl Co. 250, 333 

Quackery 21, 22, 47, 48, 

129, 130, 143, 162, 170, 196, 205, 

227, 235, 404, 405, 426, 435, 474 

Raphael, Stanley 487 

Rauscher, Dr. Frank 191, 200, 

227, 353 

RCA 341 

Reese, Carroll B 370 

Remington Arms . . . ., 250 

Rexall-Liggett Drugstores 301 

Rhodanese 104, 107, 1 18 

Richards, Dr. Victor 204 

Richardson, Elliot 43 

Richardson, Dr. John A 4, 5, 

- 135 - 138, 142, 178, 188, 198, 226, 

459, 460, 469, 470, 474 - 477, 506 

Richardson-Merrell, Inc 409 

Richfield Oil 250 

Rickets 53, 151 

Rieber, Torkild 295 

Robinson, Dr. Miles H 218 

Rockefeller, Avery 315, 329 

Rockefeller, David 341, 344, 

345, 358, 359, 398, 400, 501 

Rockefeller Empire 

Throughout Part II 

Rockefeller Foundations . .314, 340, 

359, 371-379, 397, 399, 499, 519 

Rockefeller, John D. Jr . . . 350, 397 

Rockefeller, John D., Sr . . . . . 327- 

334, 350, 360-365, 369, 371, 397 

Rockefeller, William A 329 

Rockefeller, William, II 3/4 

Rockefeller, Winthrop .... 397, 504 

Roosevelt, Franklin D. 298, 


Rosenberg, Dr. Saul A ■. . 202 

Royal Dutch 333 

Rubin, Dr. Phillis 183, 184 

Rush, Dr. Benjamin 525 

Rusk, Dean 397, 399 

Ryan,. Robert 432% 433 

Sakai, Dr. Shigeaki 134 

Sal Hepatica ' : . . 301 

Sampson, Anthony . . 296, 319, 497 

Sartorius, Dr. Otto 83 

Sasuly, Richard 248, 254, 275, 277, 
279, 280, 286, 287, 316, 484, 485 

Schaefer, Dr. Otto 68 

Schiff, (John, Jacob, & Frieda) 257 
Schmitz, Hermann ...... 248, 249, 


Schmitz, John G. 489, 491 

Schroeder, J. Henry 315, 317 

Schroeder, Rockefeller & Co 315 

Schweitzer, Dr. Albert 71 

Schwitzer, Dr. Hugo 308 

Scind Laboratories . . ; 136 

Scurvy , 17,48,53, 121 

Searle Pharmaceutical 451 

Sears. Roebuck & Co 341 

Seventh Day Adventists 73, 75. 

Shell Oil 250, 252, 255, 333, 341 

Shute, Dr. Wilfrid HI 

Sickle-cell Anemia .' . 53, 

108, 109, Appendix 
Sigiura, Dr. Kanematsu . . 462, 463 

Simmons, Dr. George 385 

Sinclair Oil 250 

Singer Corp 341 

Sloan, Alfred P . 367, 375,-378, 381 



Sloan Foundation .... 375, 378 

Sloan-Kettering Institute for Cancer 

Research.... 136; 190, 

211, 399, 457, 462-464,468-473 
Smith, Kline, and French Labs. 408 

Socialized Medicine 274, 35$, 

488, 505 

Socialists, Socialism 271, 273, 


Socony Oil 250 

Southern Pacific Railroad 341 

Southern Research Institute 39, 

136, 200 
Squibb Pharmaceutical 251, 359, 397 

Stalin, Joseph 298 

Standard Gas & Electric 317 

Standard Oil Throught Part II 

Stare, Professor '. . ~ 354, 355 

Stefansoii, Vilhjalmur 67 

Steinfeld, Dr. Jesse 431 

Sterling Products (Drug Co.) 

•' 250, 281, 301, 309, 310, 342, 407 

Stettinius, Edward .w. . 399 

Stevenson, Robert 328 

Stillman, James 333, 334 

Stocking and Watkins . . . 259, 260, 
277, 294 

Sugar 20, 21, 52, 58, 74, 

92, 106, 126, 196 

Sulfanilamide . .,. 41 1, 485 

Sulfathiazole 405, 406 

Sullivan & Cromwell 314, 315 

Sullivan, Dr. Robt. D 203, , 

- 314,315 

Surgery _. . ; ; ... 53, J69, 

17i - 178, 182, 185, 196, 202, 206, 


Szant-Gyorgyi, Dn Albert .... 121 

Taller, Dr. Herman . , 416 

Taylor Chemical Co 251 

Tax-Exempt Foundations.. 209, 271, 
350-352, 369-382, 398,. 501, 519 

Teagle, Walter 253, 256, 


Testosterone 83 

Texaco 250, 295, 333 

Thalidamide 413, 520, 521 

Time*Life Publications 341 

Tobacco .... 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 1 10 

Totalitarianism 270, 271, 174, 

277, 488, 493, 515, 516, 520 

Toxicity 42, 43, 52, 

70, 102-105,113-127,133,134, 
149,151, 196-207,219,220 

Traveler's Insur. Co. 340 

Trelford, Dr. John 199' 

Trophoblastcell .» . . . 79-102, 

110, 147, 173, 241, 242, 469, 515, 
516, 527 

Trosky, Leon* 257 

Trypsin 90, 156 

Unimed, Inc 452 

Union Oil 250 

United Drug Co , 301 

United Nations 213, 264, 335, 

354 f 397. 466, 493 - 499 
U. S. Rubber Co. ...... . 250, 341 

U. S. Steel Corp 341 

Valentine, Tom , 25 

Vanderlip, Frank A 257 

Van Ess Laboratories 251 

Vegex, Inc 251 

Vencius, Carol 157, 158 

Vick Chemical Co 301, 434 

Virginia Railroad 341 

Viruses 50, 51, 54, 56, 60, 


Vitamins Throughout 

Vitamin Bis . . 101, 138, 140, 

Vitamin B17 Throughout 

von Hoffman, Nicholas .. 521,522 

von Schnitzler, Baron . .-r . 278 

Waller, Leslie . . ! 249, 323 

Warburg, Felix, Max & Otto 

Warburg, Paul M 257, 303, 312, 313 

Warner-Lamber 397, 398 

Weflerstein, Dr. Ralph W. ... 115, 
145, 171, 190, 191,429,458 

Weiss, William .- 303 

Welch, Dr. William H. . . . 374, 377 

Western Union 341 

Westinghouse 341 

Wheeler, Dr; Owen W. . . . . 91, 92 
Whelchel, Mary ..... 422 - 425, 509 
Whitehall Laboratories 250 

>, Wiley, Harvey 410,411 

Wilkinson, Joanne 153, 154 

William S. Merrill Co 251 

Winthrop Chemical Co "250 

251, 301, 405, 406, 407, 408 

World Health Organization 466 

World Life Research Institute . 213 

' X-Ray 48, 98, 151, 155 -L65, 

169-173, 177- 188, 196, 198, 206, 

-Zeiss 289 

Zundell, Dr. J. L 33 

the revolutionary concept that cancer is a 
deficiency disease, like scurvy or pellagra, ag- 
gravated by the lack of an essential food com- 
pound in modern man's diet. That substance 
is vitamin B17. But in its concentrated and 
purified form developed specifically for 
cancer therapy, it is known as Laetrile, the 
controversial chemical that currently is 
banned in the United States. 

The story presented in this book does not 
carry the approval of orthodox medicine. The 
Food and Drug Administration, The Ameri- 
can Cancer Society, and The American Med- 
ical Association have labeled it fraud and 
quackery. Yet the evidence is overwhelming 
that here, at last, is the final answer to the 
cancer riddle. 

Why has orthodox medicine waged war 
against this non-drug approach? The author 
contends that the answer is strictly political 
and is based upon the economic and power 
goals of those who control the medical estab- 4 

trail into previously unexplored territory and 
reveals a shocking picture of how science has 
been subverted to protect entrenched com- 
mercial and political interests. It contains the 
kind of explosive impact that could topple an 
empire. And perhaps it will. 

















The Politics of Cancer Therapy 
By G. Edward Griffin 

Dedicated to the millions of cancer victims and 
their loved ones whose suffering has been the tragic 
cost of scientific arrogance and political vested in- 
terest* May the story presented in this book help to 
arouse an indignant public awareness which, alone, 
can break the hold of these deadly forces. 


The material in this volume could not have 
been assembled without the help and guidance of 
many others. First of all, I am indebted to Dr. John 
Richardson for his persistent hammering away on 
the significance of vitamin therapy until it finally 
began to penetrate into this thick skull. And to my 
wife who, for months prior, had attempted unsuc- 
cessfully to arouse my curiosity on the subject. I 
will always be indebted to Dr. Ernst T. Krebs" Jr., 
for his unbelievable patience and thoroughness in 
explaining and re-explaining so many scientific 
matters. I am grateful to Bruce Buchbihder, Ralph 
Bowman, Bob Bradford, Malvina Cassese, Frank 
Cortege, Jim Foley, Grace Hamilton, Mac and 
Idell Hays, Dr. J. Milton Hoffman, Pokie Kors- 
gaard, Sanford Kraemer, Maurice LeCover, Bob 
Lee, Betty Lee Morales, Beverly Newkirk, John 
Pursely, Julie Richardson, Bob Riddel, Lorraine 
Rosenthal, Frank Salaman, Alice Tucker, Lloyd 
Wallace, Kimo Welch, Ann Yalian, and others too 
numerous to mention for their ^strong 
encouragement, endless patience, and tangible 



Chapter XII ' 241 


A short review of the science of cancer 
therapy ; a thesis summary of the politics 
of cancer therapy; the early history of 
the I. G. Farben chemical and phar- 
maceutical cartel; a look at the cartel's 
early success in the United States with 
particular emphasis on its "marriage" 
with DuPont, Standard Oil, and Ford. 

Chapter XIII 269 


Early examples of cartel endorsement of 
totalitarian regimes; particular focus on 
I . G . Farben's role in lifting Hitler out of 
^ political oblivion and converting the 
Nazi state into an instrument of hidden 
cartel power. 

Chapter XIV , 285 


Germany's industrial preparations for 
World War 1 1 ; the continued support by - 
American industrialists given to Farben 
and to the Nazi regime during this 
period; and the profitable role played by 
Ford and ITT in war production for 
both Nazi Germany and the United 

Chapter XV 299 


Efforts to camouflage Farben owner- 
ship of firms in America; the repeated 
assistance rendered by various Rock- 
efeller interests; the successful penetra- 
tion irvtd the U . S. government by cartel 
agents; and the final disposition of the 
Farben case. 

Chapter XVI 327 


A biographical sketch of John D. Rock- 
efeller, Sr., including his lifelong 
crusade against competition; the growth 
of Standard Oil; the entry of the Rock- 
efellers into the investmen-t banking 
field; the Rockefeller influence in the 
cartelized American. pharmaceutical in- 
dustry; and an overview of the impor- 
tance of the Rockefeller family in inter- 
national politics.) 

Chapter XVII 347 


• A preview of the drug cartel'sjnfluence 
over the curricula taught within the 
nation's medical schools; the drug- 
oriented training given to all medical * 
students; the philanthropic foundation . _ 
as a special creation of cartelists to 
avoid payment of taxes; and the use of 
the foundation to obtain control over 

Chapter XVIII . 369 


The low state 1 of medical education in 
the U. S. prior to 1910; the importance 
of the Flexner Report in dramatizing the 
need for reform; the role played by the 
Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations 
in implementing the Flexner Report; 
and the use of extensive foundation 
funding as a means of gaining control 
over American jnedical schools. 

Chapter XIX ' 383 


AMA influence over the practice of 
medicine in America; the means by 
which the leadership of Jlie AMA keeps 
control away from the general member- 
ship; the extent to which the AMA is 
financed by the drug industry; and ex- 
amples ofinterlock between the two. 

Chapter XX 395 


Cartel agents in the federal government; 
the CFR examined as a parallel struc- 
ture for cartel control over U.S. foreign 
policy; cartel influence within the FDA; 
examples of FDA scientific ineptitude; 
and the growth of FDA's administrative 

Chapter XXI -421 


Specific examples of government har- 
assment of the organic nutrition and 
vitamin industry; the important role 
played by the mass communications 
media in discrediting Laetrile in the pub- 
lic mind; and a comparison of the cost of ^ r 
typical Laetrile therapy with that of or- 
thodox cancer treatments. 

Chapter XXII 437 


An analysis of the FDA's-double stan- 
dard in which harmless non-drug mater- 
ials such as organic vitamins and food . 
supplements are burdened-with restric- 
tions and regulations in excess of those 
applied to many toxic and dangerous 
drugs; special consideration of FDA at- 
titudes toward aspirin, apricot kernels, 
Aprikern, bitter almonds, fluoridated 
water, and marijuana. 

Chapter XXIII 457 

The means by which doctors are intimi- 
dated against the use of Laetrile; the 
Sloan- Kettering investigation of Lae- 
trile as. a case history of capitulation; 
_ and the courageous stand of Dr. John 
Richardson against the FDA. 

Chapter XXIV 477 

•■■. Conclusions regarding the specific mo- 
tives that have led various groups into 
opposition to vitamin therapy; particu- 
lar perspective given to the role played 
by desire for world government; a re- 
view of the "limited" vs. "total" con- 
spiracy theories; and an appraisal of 
grass-roots backlash as a force for po- 
tential change. 

Chapter XXV 511 


Areas of need for future research with 
B17; how the Laetrile controversy dif- 
fers from cancer therapy controversies 
of the past; an analogy. between biologi- „ 
cat and political cancer; and a future 
projection of how both can be con- 
quered together. 


The Politics, 
of Cancer Therapy 

. XII 





A short review of the science of 

. cancer therapy; a thesis summary 

of the politics of cancer therapy ;s 

the early history of the I.G. 

Farben chemical and 

pharmaceutical cartel; a look at 

the cartel's early success in the 

United States with particular 

emphasis on its "marriage" with 

DuPont, Standard Oil, and Ford. 

In Part One we presented the science of cancer 
therapy. Before . proceeding with Part Two, the 
politics of cancel* therapy, let's review briefly the 
major points previously covered. 

As we have seen, cancer is the unnatural and 
unchecked growth of trophoblast cells which, 
themselves, are a normal and vital part of the life 

Trophoblast cells are produced in the body^as a 
result of a chain reaction involving the hormone 
estrogen. Estrogen always is present in large quan- 



tities at the site of damaged tissue, possibly serving 
as an organizer or catalyst for body repair. 

Cancer, therefore, can be triggered by any 
prolonged stress or damage to the body — whether 
it be smoking or chemical additives to our food, or 
even certain viruses — for these are what cause the 
production of estrogen as part of the normal healing 

Nature, fortunately, has provided a metabolic 
barrier — a complex mechanism to limit and control 
the growth of these trophoblast cells. Many factors 
are involved, but the most direct-acting of these 
appear to be the pancreatic enzymes and the food 
factor known as nitriloside or vitamin B17, a unique 
compound that destroys cancer cells while nourish- 
ing and sustaining all others. 

The answer to cancer, therefore, simply is to 
avoid excessive damage or stress to the body, to 
minimize foods that preempt the pancreatic en- 
zymes for their digestion, and to maintain a diet rich 
in all minerals and vitamins — especially vitamin 


As mentioned previously, opposition to the 
nutritional concept of cancer is both strohg and 
vocal. This concept has been braaded as fraud and 
quackery by the Food and Drug Administration, 
the American Cancer Society, and the' American 
Medical Association. 

It is important to stress again, however, that 
the average physician is not part of this opposition 
— except, perhaps, to the extent to which he trust- 
ingly accepts the official pronouncements of .these 


prestigious bodies. Most doctors, however, would 
be mpre inclined to give Laetrile a try before pass- 
ing final judgment. As a result, an increasing 
number of physicians all around the world now are 
testing and proving the value of vitamin therapy in 
their own clinics. Doctors in the United States, 
however, are forbidden both by law and by the 
pressures of peer review from experimenting with 
unorthodox therapies. Consequently, they are not 
able to find out if Laetrile works, only if it is said to 

Meanwhile, with the evidence continuing to 
mount in favor of vitamin therapy, the opposition 
and the controversy also continue to grow. The 
reason is both simple and unpleasant. Cancer, in 
the Uni'ed States, at least, has become a multi- 
billion dollar business. Not only are fortunes made 
in the fields of research, drugs, and X-ray, but polit- 
ical careers, also, are enhanced by promising ever 
larger tax-supported programs and government 

It is an ominous fact that, each year, there are 
more people making a living from cancer than are 
dying from it. If the riddle were to be solved by a 
simple vitamin found abundantly and inexpensively 
in nature, this gigantic commercial^ and political 
industry could be wiped out almost overnight. It is 
not unexpected, therefore, that vested interest 
should play an important role in clouding the 
scientific facts. 

This does not mean that the surgeons, the 
radiologists, the druggists, the researchers, or the 


thousands of people who supply and support them 
would consciously withhold a control for cancer. In 
the first place, they are> for the most part, highly 
motivated and conscientious 1 individuals who 
would like nothing better; than to put an end to 
human suffering. Secondly, they and their families 
are inflicted with cancer just as much as the rest of 
the population. Obviously, they are not keeping 
any secret cures to themselves. 

But does it necessarily follow that all 
opposition is innocent? Are we to believe that per- 
sonal gain or vested interest is not a factor any- 
where along the line? The purpose of the second 
half of this presentation is to provide the answers to 
these questions. We will demonstrate that, at the 
very top of the world's economic and political 
pyramid of power there is a grouping of financial, 
industrial, and political Interests that, by the very 
nature of their goals, are the natural enemies of the 
nutritional approach to health. It will be shown that 
they have created a popular climate of bms that 
makes scientific objectivity almost an impossibility, 
and that they, themselves, often become the vic- 
tims of their own bias. 

It will be shown that these forces wield tre- 
mendous influence over the medical profession, the 
medical schools, and the medical journals; and that 
the average doctor is the last to suspect that much of 
his knowledge and outlook have been shaped sub- 
tley by these non- medical interests. 

It will be shown, also, that this elite group can 
move long levers of political power that activate 
government agencies iti their behalf; and that these 


agencies, which supposedly are the servants and 
protectors of the people, have become almost the 
total mechanism of vested interest. 

All of these, of course, are serious indictments. 
They are not made lightly, nor should they be ac- 
cepted without challenge. So let us turn now to the 
record to see what evidence there is to support 

The information that follows is taken primarily 
from government hearings and reports published by 
various Senate and House committees from 1928 to 
1946. Principal among these are the House Sub- 
committee to Investigate Nazi Propaganda in 1934, 
the Special Senate Committee Investigating the 
Munitions Industry in 1935, the report on cartels 
releasee by the House Temporary National 
Economic Committee in 1941, the Senate Special 
Committee Investigating the National Defense 
Program in 1942, the report of the Senate Patents 
Committee in 1942, and the Senate Subcommittee 
on War Mobilization in 1946. 

Other sources include the Senate Lobby In- 
vestigating Committee, theJSenate Committee on 
Banking and Currency, court records of the 
Nuremberg trials, and dozens of volumes found as 
standard references in any large library. In other 
words, although the story that follows is not widely 
known, it is, nevertheless, part of the public record 
and can be verified by anyone willing to take the 

This is that story. 

In the years prior to World War II, there came 
into existence an international cartel, centered in 


Germany, that dominated the entire world's chem- 
ical and drug industries. It had spread its operations 
to ninety-three countries and was a powerful 
economic and political force on all continents. It' 
was known as I.G. Farberi. 

I.G. stands for lnterssen Gemeinschaft, 
which means "community of interests," or more 
simply, "cartel." Farben means "dyes," which, 
because the modern chemical industry had its origin 
in the development of dyestuffs, now is a decep- 
tively innocent sounding category that, in reality, 
encompasses the entire field of chemistry , including 
.munitions and drugs. 

Munitions and drugs, of course, can be trans- 
formed into powerful human motivators. One of- 
fers the promise of health and prolonged life, while 
the other can be the carrier of death and destruc- 
tion. There can be no greater earthly desire for men 
than to have the first but to avoid the second. He 
who controls munitions and drugs, therefore, holds 
the ultimate carrot and stipk. 

The basic ingredient for almost all 
chemicals — including those that wound as well, as 
those that heal— is coal tar or crude oil. With the 
advent of the internal combustion engine, the value 
of these raw materials as the precursor of petroleum 
has given those who control their chemical conver- 
sions a degree of power over the affairs of the world 
that is frightening to contemplate. In other words, 
the present movement of civilization is driven by 
the engine of chemistry. But the fuel of chemistry is 
oil. Whereas gold once was the key to world power, 


now it is oil. And, as we shall see, it has come to 
pass that it is the same men who now control both. 

Howard Ambruster, author Qf Treason's, 
Peace, summarized as follows: 

I. G. Farben is usually discussed-as a 
huge German cartel which controls 
chemical industries throughout the world 
and from which profits flow back to the 
headquarters in Frankfort. Farben, how- . 
ever, is no mere industrial enterprise- 
conducted by Germans for the extraction 
of profits at home and abroad. JRather, it 
is and must be recognized as a cabalistic 
.organization which, through foreign sub- 
sidiaries and by secret tie-ups, operates a 
far-flung and_highly- efficient espionage 
machine — the ultimate purpose being 
world conquest — and a world super- 
state directed by Farben. 1 

Much of the earlier, scientific knowledge that, 
made it possible for German industry to assume 
world leadership in the field of organic chemistry 
was the result of the pioneering genius of the well- 
known chemist, Justus von Leibig. It is an interest- 
ing historical aside- that Leibig, shortly after he 
completed his university training in 1824, first at- 
tracted attention within the scientific community by 
publishing a paper or the chemical properties of the 

1 Ambruster, Treason's Peace, (Beechhurst Press, N.Y., 1947), p. vii. 


bitter almond, a substance rich,in vitamin B17. He 
specifically identified the presence of benzal- 
dehyde; one of the important ingredients that act 
specifically against cancer cells, but there is no 
indication that he ever followed up these studies 
with particular application to cancer therapy. 1 

I.G. Farben was created in 1926 primarily by 
the dual genius of two men: a German industrialist 
by the name of Hermann Schmitz and a Swiss 
banker by the name of Eduard <3reutert. 2 
Greutert's stock-in-trade was keeping "loose 
books" and creating financial _ mazes to conceal 
Farben ownership of specific companies. Schmitz 
also was a director of the great Deutsche 
Reichsbank and of the Bank of International Set- 
tlements headquartered' in Switzerland. And so, 
from the very beginning, the leaders of I.G. Farben 
had been an integral part of the international bank- 
ing structure. 

By the beginning of World War II, I.G. Farben 
had become the fergest industrial corporation in 
Europe, the largest chemical company in the world, 
and part of the most gigantic and powerful cartel of 
all history. 3 It would take over an hour just to read 
aloud the names of the companies around the world 
with which it had interlocking cartel agreements. 

Richard Sasuly, I.G. Farben, (Boni & Gaer, N.Y., 1947), p. 21. 

2 Greutert was a German national also. His bank was located in Basel 
and was known as Greutert & Cie. ' 

3 This was the opinion of the U.S. Department of Justice as expressed 
inV.S. vs. Allied Chemical & Dye Corp. et. al., U.S. District Court of 
New Jersey, May 14, 1942. 


There were, in fact, over 2,000 of them. 1 When the 
list is narrowed to include just those companies 
which it owned or controlledoutright, it still would 
fill many pages in a book. Here are just a few of the 
better known: 

Inside Germany, the cartel included the top six 
chemical firms and extended to virtually all of 
heavy industry as well, especially the steel indus- 
try. Hermann Schmitz was a dominant figure in the 
Krupp Steel Works and was on its board of direc- 
tors as well as on the board of the major steel 
combine, Vereinigte Stahlwerke; All-in-all, more 
than 380 German firms were controlled by the car- 

Elsewhere in Europe, I.G. Farben dominated 
such industrial giants as Imperial Chemical in 
Great Britain, Kuhlmann in France, and Allied 
Chemical in Belgium. Leslie Waller, in his The 
Swiss Bank Connection, described this network 
quite modestly when he wrote: 

Through theJBasel connection, I.G. Far- 
ben spread out across the face of the 
globe widening its grasp of the chemical 
business by establishing thoroughly con- 
cealed interests in companies in Belgium, 
England, France, Greece, Holland, 

General Eisenhower, as Supreme Commander in the American Zone 
of Occupation, reported that I.G. had stock interests in 613 corpora- 
tions, including 173 in foreign countries, piled up assets of 6 billion 
Reichsmarks, and "operated with varying degrees of power in more 
than 2,000 cartels." See New York Times, Oct. 21, 1945, Sec. I, pp. I, 


Hungary, Norway, Poland, Romania, 
. various nations of South America, Swe- 
den and the United States. 1 

In the United States the cartel had established 
important agreements with a wide spectrum of 
American industry including Abbott Laboratories, 
Alcoa, Anaconda, Atlantic Oil, Bell and Howell, 
the Borden Company, the Carnation Company, 
Ciba-Geigy, Dow Chemical, DuPont, Eastman 
Kodak, Firestone Rubber, Ford Motor, General 
Drug Company, General Electric, General Mills, 
General Motors, Cieneral Tire, Glidden Paijit, 
Goodyear Rubber, Gulf Oil, the M.W. -Kellogg 
Company, Monsanto Chemical, National Lead, 
Nestle's, Owl Drug Company, Parke Davis and 
Company, Pet Milk, Pittsburg Glass, Proctor and 
Gamble, Pure Oil, Remington Arms, Richfield Oil, 
Shell Oil, Sinclair Oil, Socony Oil, Standard Oil, 
Texaco, Union^Oil, U.S. Rubber, and hundreds 

The list of companies which it owned outright 
or in which it had (or eventually would have) a 
substantial financial-interest is equally impressive. 
It includes the Bayer Co. (producers of aspirin), the 
American LG. Chemical Corporation (manufac- 
turers of photographic film and supplies), Lederle 
Laboratories, the Sterling Drug Company, Win- 
throp Chemical, Metz Laboratories, Hoffman- 
LaRoche Laboratories, the J.T. Baker Chemical 

1 Waller, The Swiss Bank Connection, (Signet Books, The New 
American Library, Inc., N.Y., 1972), p. 162. 


Company, Whitehall Laboratories, Frederick 
Stearns and Company, the Nyal Company, Dern 
and Mitchell Laboratories, Chef-Boy-Ar-Dee 
Foods, B reck, Inc., Heyden Anti-biotics, Mac- 
Gregor Instrument Company. Antrol Lab- 
• oratories, the International Vitamin Corporation, 
Cardinal Laboratories, Van Ess Laboratories, the 
William S. Merrill Company, the Jensen 
Salsberry Laboratories, Loesser Laboratories, 
Taylor Chemical, the Ozalid Corporation, Alba 
Pharmaceutical, Bristol Meyers, Drug, Inc., 
Vegex, Inc., Squibb and Sons Pharmaceutical, and 
scores of others, many of which were large enough 
to be holding companies which, in turn, owned 
numerous smaller companies — and some not-so- 
small — as well. 1 

By 1929, 1.G. Farben had concluded a series of 
limited cartel agreements with its largest American 
competitor, the'DuPont Company. DuPbnt, of 
course, was a major power in itself and it always 
had been reluctant to enter into cooperative ven- 
tures with Farben which usually insisted on being 
the dominant partner. Consequently, the ultimate 
agreements were made indirectly through Farben's 
subsidiary, Winthrop Chemical, through Imperial 

1 The listing of these firms does not imply illegality or impropriety. It is 
merely to establish the historical facts of either cartel contractual 
interlock or outright control. These facts can be verified by consulting 
back issues of standard business references such as Standard and 
Poor's Corporation Records and Moody's Industrial Manual. See also 
.the. published findings of previous researchers in this field such as 
Cartels in Action, by Stocking and Watkins; Treason's Peace, by 
A monaster; -and The Devil's Chemist, by DuBois; all mentioned else- 
where in this study. 


Chemical (its cartel partner in Great Britain), and 
through Mitsui, its cartel partner in Japan. By 1937, 
American I. Chad substantial stock holdings iir 

.both DuPont and Eastman Kodak. The Olin Cor- 
poration, a Farben holding, entered into the man- 
ufacture of cellophane under a DuPont license. 
The primary reason that such an industrial 

s giant as DuPont ultimately relented and entered 

Jnto cartel agreements with I.G. is that Standard 
Oil of New Jersey had just done so. The combina- 
tion of these two goliaths presented DuPont with a 
serious potential of domestic competition. DuPont 
might have been able to stand firmly against I.G. 
alone, but it could not hope to take on both I.G. and 
the great Rockefeller empire as well. Standard Oil, 
therefore, was the decisive factor that brought 
together the ultimate "community of in- 
terest" — I.G., Standard Oil, Imperial Chemical, 
DuPont, and as we shall see, Shell Oil. 

The cartel agreement between I.G., Standard, 
and Shell was consummated in 1929. How it came 
about is a fascinating story in itself and sheds con- 
siderable light on the behind-the-scenes maneuvers 
of companies that, in the public eye at least, are 
considered* to be competitors. 

One of the prime causes of Germany's defeat 

„ in World War I was its lack of petroleum. German 
leaders resolved never again to be dependent upon 
the outside world for gasoline. Germany may not 
have had oil deposits within its territory, but it did 
have abundant reserves of coal. One of the first' 
goals of German chemists after the war, therefore, 
was to find a way to convert coal into gasoline. 


By 1920, Dr. Bergius had discovered ways to 
make large quantities of hydrogen and to force it, 
under great pressure, at high temperatures, and in 
the presence of specific catalysts, into liquid coal 
products. The final steps into refined gasoline were 
then assured. It was only a matter of perfecting the 
hydroge nation process: I.G. suddenly was in the oil 

One might assume that the cartel would have 
jumped into production with both feet. But their 
plan, instead, was to interest existing oil producers 
in their process and to use their patents as leverage 
to gain concessions and business advantages in 
other areas. In particular, this was to be the bait to 
ensnare Standard Oil which, in turn, would bring in 
DuPont. And it worked exactly as planned. 

Frank Howard of Standard Oil was invited to 
visit the great Baldische pjant at Ludwigshafen in 
March of 1926. What he saw was astounding — 
gasoline from coal! In a near state of shock, he 
wrote to Walter Teagle, president of Standard Oil: 

Based upon my observations and discus- 
sions today, L think that this matter is the 
most important which has ever faced the 
company .... 

The Baldische can. make high-grade 
motor oil fuel from lignite and other low- 
quality coals in amounts up to half the 
weight of the coal . This means absolutely 
the independence of Europe on the mat- 
ter of gasoline supply. Straight price 
competition is all that is left .... 


I shall not attempt to cover any details, 
but I think this will be evidence of my 
state of mind. 1 

The following three years were devoted to in- 
tense negotiation. On November 9, 1929, the cartel 
agreement was signed. It accomplished several im- 
portant objectives: First, it granted Standard Oil 
one-half of all rights to the hydrogenation process in 
all countries of the world except Germany. This 
assured Standard that it would control, or at least 
profit from, its own competition in this important 
field. In return, Standard gave I.G. 546,000 shares 
of, its stock valued at more than ,$30,000,000. The 
two parties also agreed never to compete with each 
other in the fields of chemistry and petroleum pro- 
ducts. In the future, if Standard Oil wished to enter 
the broad field of industrial chemicals or drugs, it 
would do so only as a partner of Farben. Farben, in 
turn, agreed never to enter the field of petroleum 
except as a joint venture with Standard. Each party 
disavowed "any plan or policy" of "so far expand- 
ing its existing business in the direction of the other 
party's industry as to become a serious competitor 
of that other party." 2 

As Frank Howard of Standard Oil phrased it 
several years later: 

The I.G. may be said to be our general 
partner in the chemical business . . . 

^asuly, I.G. Farben, op. cit., pp. 144-145. 

2 Stocking & Watkins, Cartels in Ajction, (The Twentieth Century 
Fund, N.Y., 1946), p. 93. 


the desire and intention of both parties is 
to avoid competing with one another. 1 

To facilitate the implementation of this agree- 
ment, several jointly-owned companies were 
formed. One of these was the International Hy- 
drogenation Patents Company (I.H.P.). Shell Oil 
also became a partner in this venture. Its purpose 
was not to promote the international use of the 
hydrogenation process, but to keep the lid orr it as 
much as possible. An official Standard memoran- 
dum declared: 

I.H.P. should keep in close touch wjith 
developments in all countries where it has 
patents, arid should be fully informed 
with regard to the interest being shown in 
hydrogenation and the prospect of its 
introduction .... It should not, how- 
ever, attempt to stir up interest in coun- 
tries where none exists. 2 

- The other jointly-owned company was created 
in 1930 and was known as Jasco, Inc. Its purpose 
was to allow 'each company to share in any future 
new chemical developments of the other. Under the 
agreement, whenever I. G. or Standantdeveloped a 
new chemical process, it would offer to the other 
party an option of obtaining one-third interest in the 
patent. Jasco then would exploit the marketing of 
that process throughout the world. 

*As quoted by Armbruster, Treason' s<Peace, op. cit., p. 52. 
2 Ibid., pp. 492, 493. 


Here, then, was a perfect example of how two 
giant industrial empires came together, step at a 
time, until eventually, in large areas of their activ- 
ity, they were moving in unison as one. The goal of 
each simply was to remove all marketplace compe- 
tition between themselves and assure that each had 
a secure guarantee of future growth and profit. Dr. 
Carl Bosch, head of I.G. at the time, was 7 not 
merely being picturesque, when he said that I.G. 
and Standard had "married." He was describing 
quite accurately the philosophical essence of all 
major cartel agreements. 

Space does not permif a detailed chronicle of 
all of I.G. Farben's polygamous marriages with 
other mqjor U.S. firms, but at least two more should 
be mentioned in passing. On October 23, 1931, I.G. 
and Alcoa signed an accord, known as the Alig 
Agreement, in which the two cotnpanies pooled all 
their patents and technical knowledge on the pro- 
duction of magnesium. The other industrial giant 
that became part of the international web was none 
other than the Ford Motor Company. 

When Henry Ford established a branch of his 
company in Germany, I.G. Farben immediately 
purchased most of the forty percent of the stock 
which was offered for sale. The marriage was com- 
pleted when Carl Bosh, I.G.'s president, and Carl 
Krauch, I.G.'s chairman of the board, both joined 
the board of directors of the German Ford Com- 
pany. In the United States, Edsel Ford joined the 
board of directors of the American I.G. Chemical 
Company, as did Walter Teagle, president of Stan- 


dard Oil, Charles E. Mitchell, president of 
Rockefeller's National City Bank of New York, 
arid Paul M. Warburg, brother of* Max Warburg 
who was a director of N the parent company in Ger- 

To the student of contemporary history, these 
names are highly significant. Paul Warburg comes 
from a family well-known in international banking 
circles. He generally is credited with being one of 
the. chief architects of the Federal Reserve System 
which succeeded in placing control over the Ameri- 
can monetary system into the hands of those same 
banking circles he represented. He not only was 
instrumental in introducing the Federal Reserve 
Act, but became the first chairman of the Federal 
Reserve Board. According to the memoirs of Frank 
A. Vanderlip, published* 3 years later, this whole 
scheme was hatched at a secret meeting on the 
remote Jekyll Island in Georgia attended by Van- 
derlip himself, the Warburgs, the Morgans, and the 
Rockefellers. Paul's other brother, Felix Warburg, 
married Frieda Schiff, the daughter of Jacob Schiff 
who headed the New York banking firm of Kuhn, 
Loeb and Company. Years later, according to his 
grandson, John, Jacob Schiff had given twenty mil- 
lion dollars to Trdsky for use in establishing a 
Soviet Dictatorship in Russia. 1 

There is much more of significance known 

1 The comments by John Schiff first appeared in the Charlie Knicker- 
bocker column of the New York Journal American, Feb. 3, 1949. See 
also the exclusive interview with Alexander Kerensky, leader of the 
Russian revolution, U.S. News & World Report, Mar. 13, 1967, p. 68. 


about these men, but suffice it to say that they were 
far more than mere businessmen looking for a 
means of expanding markets and securing profits. 
They were part of that special breed of businessmen 
whose visions extend far beyond the profit-and-loss 
ledgers to the horizons of international intrigue and 

Which brings us to the question: What are the 
motives of such men? What do they hope to accom- 
plish? And how do they operate? 

To answer these questions, it is necessary first 
to understand fully the nature and function of car- 
tels. A cartel is an international grouping of com- 
panies that is bound together by contracts or 
agreements designed to s promote inter-company 
cooperation and, thereby, reduce competition 
among them. Some of tlfese agreements may deal 
with such harmless subjects as industry standards 
and nomenclature. But most of them involve the 
exchange of patent rights, the dividing up of re- 
gional markets, the setting of prices, and agreements 
not to enter into product competition within specific 
categories. Generally, a cartel is a means of escap- 
ing the rigors of competition in the open free- 
enterprise market. The result always is higher 
prices and fewer products from which to choose. 
Cartels and monopolies, therefore, are not the re- 
sult of free enterprise, but the escape from it. 

The motivation that drives businessmen into 
cartel agreements is very similar to that which leads 
laborers and skilled workers into trade unions and 
professional associations. They reason that by low- 


ering the price on their product or their labor they 
might be able to attract a greater share of the exist- 
ing market. But that is only true if others do not 
follow their example. It is reasonable to assume, 
hpwfcvej, that the competition will lower its prices 
also in order to avoid losing patronage. A price cut^ 
by one tends to lower the prices of all. A person is 
encouraged, therefore, to join with other firms or 
other workers and draw up agreements between 
them, not to follow competitive policies that will 
impoverish all. 

This does not mean, however, that the cartel 
members have succeeded in eliminating all Conflict 
or competition between them. Occasionally a party 
to an agreement will decide that the terms of the 
agreement no longer are acceptable, and it will 
break away and attempt to go it alone. Price wars 
and fierce contests for markets periodically erupt 
with all the overtones of military war itself. But, just 
as in the case of war between nations, eventually it 
comes to an end. One party either is vanquished or, 
as is more often the case in business wars, one party 
clearly emerges with the dominant position, and 
then a "truce" and a new negotiated cartel agree- 
ment is worked out on the basis of the new balance 
of power. 

Stocking and Watkins, writing in Cartels in 
Action, describe this process quite succinctly: 

"Price wars" broke out, were terminated 
• by "armistices," recurrently flamed up 
again, and finally settled into a long 
Siege .... 


Chemical companies usually decide who 
shall sell what, where, how much, and on 
what terms in foreign markets, by negoti- 
ation rather than by competition, because 
they believe that cooperation "pays." 
They reach their decisions by driving 
hard-headed bargains. Each party tries to 
obtain the best terms for itself. Thus 
these decisions reflect the relative bar- 
gaining power of the parties involved. 
This depends on many factors including 
the efficiency of their processes, strength? """ 
of their patent positions, quality of their 
products, extent of their financial re- 
sources, and support of their govern- 
ments. In the final analysis, the issue 
turns on the comparative readiness of the 
several parties for a competitive "war" if 
-* negotiations break down. 

This kind of business rivalry differs from 
effective competition in that the bulk of 
its benefits are likely to go to the cartel * 
members rather than to the consumers. 1 

There can be no doubt that this is an accurate 
description of the hidden reality behind. most of the 
world's major products today. Stocking and Wat- 
Tcins made extensive calculations of pre-war trade 
and proved quite convincingly that, in the United 
States, in the year 1939, cartels controlled eighty- 
seven percent of the mineral products sold, sixty 

x Op. cit., pp. 398, 420. 


percent of the agricultural products, and forty- two 
percent of all manufactured products. Needless to 
say, the trend has greatly accelerated since 1939, so 
one can well imagine what the situation is like 
today. The chemical industry — and that includes 
pharmaceuticals — is, and has been from the very 
beginning, almost completely cartelized. Even as 
far back as 1937, this fact was so obvious that 
Fortune magazine editorialized: 

The chemical industry; despite its slowly 
lowering curve of real prices, is an "or- 
derly" industry. It was practicing "coop- 
eration' ' long before General Johnson in- 
vented it in 1933. It has seldom been be- 
deviled by over production, has had no 
private depression of its own, and has not 
often involved itself in long or bloody 
price wafrs . . . . By and large, the chemi- 
cal industry has c regulated itself in a man- 
' ner that would please even a Soviet 
Commissar .... The industry ... is 
. . . the practitioner of one definite sort 
of planned economy. 1 

This is highly reminiscent of the sentiments 
expressed in 1973 by the United States Tariff 
Commission. In its report to the Senate, it said: 

In the largest and most sophisticated mul- 
tinational corporations, planning and 
subsequent monitoring of plan fulfillment 

^'Chemical Industry," Fjortune, Dec, 1937, pp. 157, 162. 


have reached a scope and level of detail 
that, ironically, resemble more than 
superficially the national planning proce- 
dures of Communist countries. 1 

The comments about resembling the planned 
economy of a Soviet Commissar in a Communist 
country are quite "on target." They shed a great 
deal of light on the inherent philosophy of cartels. If 
it is true that cartels and monopolies are not the 
result of free enterprise but the escape/rom it, then 
it follows that the best way to escape free enterprise 
is to destroy it altogether. This is why cartels and 
collectivist governments inevitably work together 
as a team. They have a common enemy and share a 
common objective: the destruction of free enter- 
prise. / 

A million dollars put into politics to bring about 
the passage of a protective tariff law, a so-called 
fair-trade law, or an anti-quackery law, is a tre- 
mendous bargain for those who benefit. Even 
though these laws are masqueraded as for the be- 
nefit for the people, in reality they are designed as a 
means of putting the entire machinery of govern- 
ment into motion against cartel competitors, and 
result in a return on their original investment many 
times over. Big government, therefore, with its 
capacity to regulate every facet of economic life, is 
the natural friend and ally 6'f cartels and 

Anyone who pauses to reflect on this for even a 

'Report entitled Implications of Multinational Firms for World Trade 
and Investment for U.S. Trade and Labor? Feb. 1973, p. 159.* 


moment is bound to realize not only the truth but 
the profound importance of this statement. Cartels 
and monopolies, outside of the political environ- 
ment of big government, would be hard-pressed to 
exist, at least at the level and size that they do now. 
Look at any of the major world markets — in sugar, 
tea, chocolate, rubber, steel, petroleum, au- 
tomobiles, food — any of them, and one will find a 
mountain of government restrictions, quotas, and 
price supports. And behind this mountain, there is 
an army of lobbyists representing special interests 
applying endless pressures on politicians who, in 
turn, endorse the laws that supposedly, are de- 
signed to protect the people. 

Cartels are not alone in this racket. Organized 
labor sought the escape from free-market competi- 
tion when it demanded government-enforced 
minimum wage laws and the closed shop. Farmers 
did the same with "price supports and subsidies. It 
seems that, increasingly of late, almost everyone 
wants the government to step in and "protect" 
them from the rigors of open and honest competi- 
tion. The cartels are no different in this except that 
they were ahead of most of the others, have more 
money to spend, and have perfected the art to its 
ultimate state. 

It is not merely a question of prestige, there- 
fore, but a matter of pure necessity that large multi- 
national corporations often have prominent politi- 
cal figures on their boards. ITT, for example, dis- 
plays on its main board in New York such 
significant names as Eugene Black, former head of 
the World Bank, and John McCone, former direc- 


tor of the Central Intelligence Agency. In Europe 
it has had such figures as Trygve Lie, first 
Secretary-General of the United Nations, Paul- 
Henri Spock of Belgium, and Lord Caccia of Bri- 
tain. There was even an attempt to recruit Harold 
McMillan. 1 

It is no coincidence that all of the above-named 
individuals are self-classified either as socialists or, 
at the very least, political liberals. None of them 
would be caught dead defending the classical free 
enterprise system. They all know that, in the last 
few decades, that system quietly has been changed 
into one in which the road to wealth is traveled not 
by the carriage of industrial expertise, but by the 
rocket of political influence. Government is where 
the action is. 

The consequences of this reality can be seen 
everywhere — especially in the world of interna- 
tional finance. The situation was well expressed in 
the January 1973 Monthly Review of the Bank of 

There appears to be no ready answer to 
the complex interrelated domestic and in- 
ternational developments. Those stand- 
ing to lose the most include the individu- 
als who seek to establish their own busi- 
ness, and those independent domestic 
firms seeking to compete in the traditional 
open market place. They face increasing 
regimentation through bureaucratic red 

'Anthony Sampson, The Sovereign State of ITT, (Stein & Day, N. Y. 
1973), pp. 113, 114. 


tape and pre-empted markets by federally 
subsidized competition. 

Virtually immune are the multi-natipnal 
corporations whose massive investments 
abroad, and effective lobbying positions, . 
and allegiance to a world market unob- 
structed by local government and com- 
petition, place them in a position to not 
only straddle these developments but to 
. encourage them. 

Ferdinand Lundberg, in his monster of a book, 
The Rich and the Super Rich, put aside his cliches 
about the "exploitation of the working class," and 
his outspoken apologies for the Soviet system long 
enough to recognize certain truths, or half-truths at 
least, about the American system. He wrote, al- 
most with glee: 

The restriction of free enterprise has also 
come principally from businessmen who 
have constantly sought to increase gov- 
ernment regulation in their own interest, 
as in the case of tariffs, subsidies, and 
prohibition of price r cutting on 
trade marked items. 

In fact, the interests of businessmen have 
changed to a considerable extent from 
efficiency in production, to efficiency in 
public manipulation, including manipula- 
tion of the government for attainment of 
preferential advantages .... 


As everything thus far inquired into has 
obviously flowed under the benign provi- 
dence of government, it is evident that 
government and politics have more than a 
little to do with the gaudy blooms of ex- 
treme wealth and poverty in the feverish 
American realm. 1 

All of which is true; but it is not all that is true. 
There are two traps that can ensnare the unwary 
student of these trends. The first is the hasty con- 
clusion that cartels and monopolies are an expres- 
sion of capitalism or free enterprise, and that the 
solution to the problem lies in the replacement of 
capitalism with some other kind of system. As we 
have emphasized, however, cartels and Monopolies 
are just the opposite of competitive capitalism and 
free enterprise. The second trap is the conclusion 
that the solution for the abuses of cartels and 
monopolies is to be found in the increase of gov- 
ernment regulations and controls. But that is pre- 
cisely the problem already. It simply is not humanly 
possible to draw up a new law or combination of 
laws granting increased power to government, sup- 
posedly to regulate commerce and to prevent 
monopoly and their political puppets, without ac- 
complishing just the opposite of its stated objective. 
Current anti-trust laws are a perfect example. 

To understand the truth of this fact, all one 
needs to do is recall the recent ITT scandals involv- 
ing the presidency itself. Anti-trust laws, more 

^undberg, The Rich and the Super-Rich, (Bantam Books, N.Y., 
1968), pp. 153, 154, 584. 


often than not, end up merely being the instruments 
whereby one business group uses the power of 
government to supress or hinder its less politically 
influential competitors. Bigger and stronger 
government is not the solution, it is the problem! 
Lundberg avoided the first trap successfully 
but fell total victim to the second. He recognized 
that monopoly was not free enterprise. He even 
saw that government was the inseparable partner of 
monopoly. But, having done so, he then turned 
around and opened the door for a move into bigger 
government, and even a "forward" step into 
Communism itself. 

We cannot go back to competition. We 
mustip forward to some new system — 
perhaps Communism, perhaps co- 
operativism, perhaps much more com- 
plete governmental regulation than we 
now have. I don't know what lies ahead 
and I am not particularly 
concerned. . . . 1 

There, in a nutshell, is the most likely reason 
that Mr. Lundberg' s amazingly dull and oversized 
book (1009 pages) has been' pushed into the best- 
seller list by the very Establishment which, on the 
surface at least, he supposedly condemns. If men 
like Lundberg would only stop to wonder why they 
are hired to teach at Establishment universities, and 
why their books are eagerly sought by Establish- 
ment publishers, and why they are in demand for 

'Ibid., p. 154. 


TV and radio appearances on Establishment net- 
works, and why they receive generous financial 
grants from Establishment foundations, they just 
might begin to catch on. The "super-rich" do not 
particularly care if their vast wealth and power is 
exposed so long as nothing practical is done to stop 

If anyone has to be recognized as a crusader 
against them, how much better it is to have some- 
one like Lundberg, rather than an individual who 
also is a foe of big government. There is now a 
whole breed of government-worshipping intellec- 
tuals leading the American people in their struggle 
against the increasingly oppressive Establishment. 
Yet, the Establishment happily tolerates them all 
and even sponsors them in their heroic efforts. As 
long as they can view "much more complete gov- 
ernment regulation" or even Communism as a step 
4 'forward," then they certainly are no threat, to say 
the least. Quite to the contrary, as the following 
chapters will make amply clear, the continued con- 
centration of government power into the hands of a 
few — until it is total power — is exactly what the 
world's "super-rich" are determined to achieve. 





Early examples of cartel 

endorsement of totalitarian 

regimes; particular focus on l.G. 

Farben's role in lifting Hitler out of 

political oblivion and converting 

the Nazi state into an instrument of 

hidden cartel power. 

At this point in our survey, the reader may 
wonder what on earth does all of this have to do 
with the politics of cancer therapy. The answer — 
as will become evident further along — is that it has 
everything to do with it. The politics of cartels and 
monopolies can be likened to afootball game with 
specific goals and rules. If one who had never heard 
of football before came across two teams playing on 
the field, and if he knew nothing at all about the 
sport, he would be totally confused as to what was 
going on. Likewise, we can look at the actions of 
giant corporations and government agencies but, if 
we are unaware of the rules that determine the play, 
we will never be able to understand why things 
happen as they do, or even be able to tell what is 
happening in the first place. 



As outlined in the previous chapter, cartels and 
monopolies result from an effort to escape the 
rigors of free enterprise. In the long ran, the best 
way to do that is to enlist the aid of government, to 
seek the passage of laws that will put the regulatory 
power of the state on the side of the business ven- 
ture and against its competition. 

An individual or a corporation can succeed in 
breaking the cartels if they are determined and 
taletited enough and can raise the necessary capital. 
The capital is relatively easy if the promise of profits 
is great — as it will be if the cartel's marketing and 
pricing policies are far out of line; If they are not out 
of line, then the harm they do is relatively small and 
there is no pressing need to disrupt them. 

It follows, therefore, that cartels and 
monopolies could not flourish as they do if they 
existed in a political environment of limited gov- 
ernment. Conversely, the more extensive the 
power of government, the more it is accepted by its 
citizens as the proper regulator and arbiter of com- 
merce — even though this acceptance may be on 
the naive assumption that this will prevent 
monopolies and cartels — then the more fertile is 
the ground for their nourishment and growth. 

It follows, also, that if big government is good 
for cartels, then bigger government is better, and 
total government is best. It is for this reason that, 
throughout their entire history, cartels have been 
found to be the behind-the-scenes promoters of 
every conceivable form of totalitarianism. They 
supported the Nazis of Germany, they embraced 
the Fascists in Italy. They financed the Bolsheviks 


in Russia. And they are the driving force behind 
that nameless totalitarianism that increasingly be- 
comes a grim reality in the United States of 


At first glance, many persons cannot under- 
stand why the "super rich" so often are found in 
support of socialism or socialist measures. To the 
uninitiated, it would appear that these would be the 
people with the most to losfe. But, under socialism 
— or any other form of big government — there is 
no competition and there is no free enterprise, a 
goal much to be desired if one not only is operating a 
cartelized industry but also happens to have pow- 
erful political influence "at the top." This way, one 
can make larger profits and be part of the ruling 
class as v/ell. These people do not fear the progres- 
sive taxation scheme that oppresses the middle 
class, for their political influence enables them to 
set up elaborate tax-exempt foundations to. pre- 
serve and multiply their great wealth with virtually 
no tax at all. Which is why monopolists can never 
be true capitalists. . 

In the narrow sense of the word, a capitalist 
merely is a person who believes in the concept of 
private ownership of property. But this is not an 
adequate definition for a clear understanding of the 
ideological conflicts between the term capitalism, 
as it generally is used, and opposing concepts usu- 
ally identified as socialism or communism. In many 
barbaric tribes there supposedly is no such thing as 
private property. All things are held by the chief on 
behalf and in the name of his followers. The net 
result, though, is that the property belongs to the 


chief, because he can do with it whatever he 
pleases. Freedom of use is the test of ownership. If 
you think you own a piece of property but cannot 
use it without getting permission from someone 
else, then you do not own it, he does. The extent to 
which you do not have control over your property is 
the extent to which someone else has a share of 
ownership in it. So the chief owns all the property, 
and the business about holding it in the name of his 
followers is just to keep them from becoming too 
unhappy with the situation. 

Likewise, our own TV A or other public 
utilities are supposed to be owned by "the people." 
If you really think you own a part of the TVA, 
however, just try to sell your share and see how far 
you get. The TVA is owned by those who deter- 
mine how it is to be used. Which means it is owned 
by the politicians and the bureaucrats. 

In Communist countries, almost all of the 
property supposedly is owned by "the people" — 
which means, in reality, by the three percent who 
are members of the Communist Party and, more 
particularly, by the handful who comprise the 

All of this merely is to set the stage for the fact 
that everyone is a capitalist. All desirable property 
is owned by someone. And some of the world's 
greatest wealth is very privately owned by Com- 
munist commissars who are experts at condemning 
the "evil" doctrine of capitalism. 

So just owning property does not make one a 
capitalist. The more classical and correct useof the 
word includes the additional concept of free enter- 


prise, the open marketplace with an absence or a 
minimum of government intervention. It is with this 
connotation that the word capitalist is used here. 

So, returning to our point of departure, 
monopolists never can be true capitalists. Without 
exception, they embrace either socialism or some" 
other form of collectivism, for these represent the 
ultimate monopoly. Such government monopolies 
generally are tolerated by the people because they 
assume that, by the magic of the democratic pro- 
cess and the power of their vote, somehow, it is 
they who are the benefactors. This might be true if 
they took the trouble to become thoroughly in- 
formed on such matters, and if they had totally 
independent and honest candidates from which to 
choose, and if the political parties were not domi- 
nated by the super-rich, and if it were possible for 
men to win elections without vast sums of campaign 
money. In other words, government monopolies 
theoretically could work in the best interest of the 
voters only on some other planet, with some other 
life form responding to some other motives, and 
under some other system. As for us earthlings, 
forget it. 

The reality* therefore, is that government be- 
comes the tool of the very forces that, supposedly, 
it is regulating. The regulations, upon close exami- 
nation, almost always turn out to be exactly what 
the cartels have agreed upon beforehand, except 
that now they have the police power of the state to 
enforce them. And it makes it possible for these 
financial and political interests to become totally 
secure froip the threat of possible competition. 


About the only time that these regulations are used 
to the actual detriment of any of the multi-national 
companies or financial institutions is when they are 
part of the internal struggle of one group maneuver- 
ing for position or attempting to discipline another 
group. The "people" are never the benefactors. 

One of the earliest examples of cartel support 
for totalitarian regimes occurred in Germany even 
before World War I. Those cartels which, later, 
were to join together into the I. G. Farben, sup- 
ported Bismarck because they saw in his collec- 
tivist philosophy of government an excellent oppor- 
tunity to gain favoritism in the name of patriotism. 

Bismarck was the first to introduce socialized 
medicine as we know it in the modern world. He 
recognized that its popular appeal among the mas- 
ses would cause it to become the opening wedge for 
socializing — and thus controlling — the rest of the 
economy later on. It was his view that socialized 
medicine would lead the way to a socialized nation. 
It was a pilot operation studied and imitated by all 
the world's totalitarians in succeeding years. 1 And 
fascism certainly was no exception. 

In 1916, while still under the regime of Kaiser 
Wilhelm, an official of I. G. Farben, named 
Werner Daitz, wrote an essay that was printed and 
widely distributed by the cartel. In it he said: 

*For background on Bismarck's first government health insurance 
program, and its ultimate incorporation into the programs of the Inter- 
national Labor Organization (ILO), see Marjorie Shearon's Wilbur J. 
Cohen: The Pursuit of Power, (Shearon Legislative Service, 8801 
Jones Mill Rd., Chevy Chase, Md., 20015, 1967), pp. 3-8. 


The American economist, Robert Brady, de- 
scribed the German fascist state as "a dictatorship 
of monopoly capitalism. Its 'fascism' is that of busi- 
ness enterprise organized on a monopoly basis and 
in full command of all the military, police, legal and 
propaganda power of the state . ' ' l 

Stocking and Watkins summed it up this way: 

The German chemical industries came as 
close to complete cartelization as the 
combined efforts and organizational tal- 
ents of German business and a Nazi state 
could achieve — and that was close, in- 
deed. Even before 1933, industrial syn- 
dicalization had progressed far, perhaps 
farthest of all in chemicals. Fascism 
merely completed the program and inte- 
grated the entire structure . . . In the car- 
tels which the Nazi state set up over 
German industry, it was often hard to 
determine where state control ended and 
cartel control began. Totalitarianism ul- 
timately involved almost complete unifi- 
cation of business and state. 2 

This unification, of course, did not just hap- 
pen. It came about as a result of long and patient 
efforts on the part of cartel leaders, plus the corrup- 
tibility of politicians, plus the abysmal naivete of 
the voters. Long before Hitler became a national 

^asuly, /. G. Farben, op. cit., p. 128. 

2 Stocking and Watkins, Cartels in Action, op. cit., pp. 411, 501. 


figure, the cartel had been the dominant force * be- 
hind the scenes, in a long succession of German 
governments. I. G.'s president Hermann Schmitz, 
had been a personal advisor to Chancellor Bruen- 
ing. Dr. Karl Duisberg, I. G.'s first chairman, (also 
founder of the American Bayer Co.) and Carl 
Bosch, Schmitz' s predecessor as president trf I. G., 
recognizing the possibilities of controlling govern- 
ment officials from behind the scenes, created a 
secret four-man Pplitical Committee for the pur- 
pose of forcing a controlling link with each of 
Germany's political parties. At the Nuremberg tri- 
als, Baron von Schnitzler testified that I.G. did not 
hesitate to use plenty of hard cash in its role of 
hidden political manipulator. He estimated that 
each election cost the cartel about 400,000 marks — 
which in the 1930's was a considerable expenditure. 
But in this way, the cartel was protected no matter 
who came out on top in the political arena. 1 

As early as 1925, the cartel was setting the pace 
of German politics. In a speech to the central or- 
ganization of industry, the Reichsverband der 
Deutschen, Carl Duisberg explained: 

Be united, united, united! This should be 
the uninterrupted call to the parties in the 
. . . Reichstag. ... We hope that our 
words of today will work, and will find the 
strong man who will finally bring 

*A parallel to the hidden manipulation of American political parties is 
both obvious and ominous. For the author's analysis of this situation, 
see his The Capitalist Conspiracy, (American Media, Thousand Oaks, 
Calif., 1971). 


everyone under one umbrella ... for he 
[the strong man] is always necessary for 
us Germans, as we have seen in the case 
of Bismarck. 1 

At first, the cartel, was not convinced that Hitler, 
was the "strong man" that would best serve their 
purposes. But his program of national socialism and 
his ability to motivate large crowds through ora- 
tory, singled him out for close watching. Although 
certain leading members of the trust had cast their 
lot with Hitler as early as 1928, it wasn't until 1931 
that the cartel officially began to make sizable con- 
tributions to the Nazi war chest. Max Ilgner, a 
nephew of Hermann Schmitz, was the first to estab- 
lish a close and personal contact with Hitler. Ilgner 
generally was referred to as I. G.'s "Director of 
Finance.", His real function, however, was as head 
of the organization's international spy network. 
Originally conceived as a means of gathering infor- 
mation about competitive business ventures, it ex- 
panded rapidly into a politically oriented operation 
that seldom has been equalled even by the efficient 
intelligence agencies of modern governments. In 
fact, as Sasuly observed: 

So complete was the coverage of every 
. important aspect of conditions in foreign 
countries, that Farben became one of the 
main props of botlfWehrmacht and Nazi 
Party intelligence. ...What is remarkable 

Sasuly, /. G. Farben, op. cit. p. 65. 


^ is the fact that the Supreme Command 
of the Army, which boasted of having the 
most highly-developed staff in the world, 
should call on a private business concern 
to do this work for it. Even more remark- 
able is Ilgner's own admission that rela- » 
tions with the. OKW [Army Supreme 
Command] began as far back as 1928. l 

In the following years, even closer ties were to 
be established by an I. G. official named Gat- 
tineau. Gattineau had been the personal assistant of 
first Duisberg and then Bosch. He also acted as 
I. G.'s public relations director. 

In the fall of 1932, the Nazi Party began to lose 
ground badly, yet, out of all the contesting groups, 
the Nazis were most suitable to Duisberg's plans. 
So, at the crucial moment, the entire weight of the 
cartel was thrown in Hitler's direction. Just the 
initial financial contribution alone was three million 
marks! And much more was to.follow. 

As Sasuly described it: 

Hitler received backing more powerful 
than he had ever dared hope for. The 
industrial and financial leaders of Ger- 
many, with I. G. Farben in the lead, 
closed ranks and gave Hitler their full 
support. . . . With that backing, he 
quickly established a blood-thirsty fascist 
state. 2 

'Ibid., pp: 97, 98. 
*Ibid. 9 pp. 63, 69. 


Not only did the money come in what seemed 
like unlimited quantities, but many of the leading 
German newspapers, which were either owned by 
or beholden to the cartel because of its advertising 
accounts, also lined up behind Hitler and r thus, 
created that necessary image of universal popular- 
ity that, in turn, conditioned the German people to 
accept him as the great leader. 

Even in the United States this heavy-handed 
tactic was used. If an American newspaper was 
unfriendly to the Nazi regime, I. G. withheld its 
advertising — which was a tremendous economic 
lever. In 1938, I. G. sent a letter to Sterling Pro- 
ducts, one of its American subsidiaries, directing 
that, in the future, all advertising contracts must 
contain "... a legal clause whereby the contract-is 
immediately cancelled if overnight the attitude of 
the paper toward Germany should be changed." 1 

As previously mentioned, Schmitz had been 
the personal advisor to Chancellor Bruening. After 
Hitler, he became an honorary member of the 
Reichstag and also a Geheimrat, a secret or confi- 
dential counselor. Another High-ranking Farben of- 
ficial, Carl Krauch, became Goering's trusted ad- 
visor in carrying out the Four Year Plan. But, as a 
matter of policy, the leaders of the cartel avoided 
taking official government positions for them- 
selves, even though they could have had almost any 
post they desired. As a matter of fact, Schmitz 
repeatedly had declined the offer to be named as the 
"Commissar of German Industry." 

l Ibid., p. 106. 


The Nazi regime was the Frankenstein mon- 
ster created by Farben. But Farben was, at all 
times, the master, in spite of shrewd efforts on its 
.part to make it look to outsiders as though it had 
become the helpless victim of its own creation. This 
was extremely wise, as was demonstrated later at 
the Nuremberg trials. Almost all of these men were 
deeply involved with the determination of Nazi 
policies throughout the war — and even had coor- 
dinated the operation of such concentration camps 
as Auschwitz, Bitterfdd, Walfen, Hoechst, Agfa, 
Ludwigshafen, and Buchenwaldfor the value of the 
slave labor they provided. They built the world's 
largest poison gas industry and used the product 
experimentally on untold thousands who perished 
in those camps. 2 

Also, they had used their international busi- 
ness operations as a cover for espionage^ sabotage, 
and terror all around the world. 

In May of 1941 , Richard Krebs, who had been 
first a Communist and then a Nazi (and subse- 
quently turned against both), 2 testified before the 
House Committee on Un-American Activities and 

The I. G. Farbenindustrie, I know from 
personal experience, was already in 1934 
completely in the hands of the Gestapo. 

*For an excellent account of Farben's role in administering these 
camps, see The Devil's Chemists, by Josiah E: DuBois, Jr., legal 
counsel and 'investigator for the prosecution at the trial of I. G. 
Farben's leaders at Nuremberg, (Beacon Press, Boston, 1952). 

2 See Kreb's own personal account, written under the pen name of Jan 
Valtin, entitled Out of the Night (Alliance Book Corporation, N.Y., 


They went so far as to have their own 
Gestapo prison on the factory grounds of 
their large works at Leuna and; . .began, 
particularly after Hitler's ascent to 
power, to branch out in the foreign field 
through subsidiary factories. 1 

At the Nuremberg trials, however, the leaders 
of Farb6n were dismissed by the judges,, not as Nazi 
war criminals like their underlings who wore the 
uniforms, but as over-zealous businessmen merely 
in pursuit of profits. At the conclusion of the trials, 
a few were given light sentences, but most of them 
walked out of the courtroom scot-free. Yes, their 
strategy of remaining behind the scenes was wise, 

One cannot help drawing parallels to political 
realities in the United States. More and more, we 
are learning that the men who wield the greatest 
power in America are not those whose names ap- 
pear on our ballots but those whose signatures 
appear on the bottoms of checks — particularly 
when those checks are for campaign expenditures. 

From time to time, the operations of these 
finpols (financier-politicians) accidentally ai;e ex- 
posed to public view, and, for a fleeting second, we 
can see their hidden hands in every sphere of gov- 
ernment activity. Time and again we have' learned 
of some private sector wielding undue influence in 
foreign policy, monetary decisions, farm programs, 
labor laws, tariffs, tax reform, military contracts, 
and, yes, even cancer research. We are assured, 

*As quoted by Ambruster, Treason's Peace, op. cit., p. 273. 


however, that these manipulators are just 
businessmen. They are not politically motivated 
for, otherwise, they would run for office or would 
accept appointments to important public posts. If 
they have any political ideology at all, undoubtedly, 
they must oppose socialism because, see, they are 
rich capitalists! They may be guilty of greed and a 
little graft, but nothing more serious than Jthat. 

Let us hope that the memory of Auschwitz and 
Buchenwald will dispel such nonsense while there 
still is time. 


Germany's industrial 

preparations for World War II; 

the continued support by 

American industrialists given to 

Farben and to the Nazi regime 

during this period; and the 

profitable role played by Ford 

and ITT in war production for 

both Nazi Germany and the 

United States. 

By 1932 it was obvious to many observers that 
Nazi Germany was feverishly preparing for war. It 
* was equally obvious that I. G. Farben was both the 
instigator and the benefactor of these preparations. 
It was during these years that German industry ex- 
perienced its greatest growth and its highest profits. 

In the United States, however, things were not 
going as smoothly for the cartel subsidiaries and 
partners. As the war drew nearer, the American 
companies continued to share their latest patents 
and technical information on their newest proces- 
ses. But Farben was returning the favor less and 
less — especially if the information had any poten- 
tial value in war production, which, of course, 
much of it did. When the American companies 



complained, Farben replied that it was forbidden by 
the Nazi government to give out this information 
and, that if they did so, they would be in serious 
trouble with the authorities! 

Meanwhile, the American companies con- 
tinued to honor their end of the contracts, mostly 
because they were afraid not to. In almost every 
case Farben controlled one or more patents that 
were vital to their operations, and any overt con- 
frontation could easily result in a loss of these valu- 
able processes which would mean certain business 
disaster. This was particularly true in the field of 

Rubber, of course, is basic to modern transpor- 
tation. It is a companion product to gasoline inas- 
much as it supplies the wheels which are driven by 
the gasoline engines. Without rubber, normal 
economic life would be most difficult. Modern war- 
fare would be almost impossible, 

I. G. had perfected the process for making 
buna rubber but did not share the technology with 
its American partners. Standard Oil, on the other 
hand, had been working on another process for 
butyl rubber and passed on all of its knowledge and 

Sasuly summarizes the situation that resulted: 

True to their obligations to the N^zis, 
Standard sent the butyl information. But 
• they did not feel any obligation to the 
U.S. Navy. In 1939, after the outbreak of 
war, a representative of the Navy's 


Bureau of Construction and Repair vis- 
ited Standard's laboratories and was 
steered away from anything which might 
give clues as to the manufacture of butyl. 

Standard did not have the full buna rub- 
ber information. But wtoat information it 
did have, it only gave to the U.S. rubber 
makers after much pressure by the gov- 
ernment when war was already under- 
way. As for butyl rubber, Standard did 
not give full rights to manufacture under 
its patents until March, 1942. ... 

Because of a cartel of the natural rubber 
producers, the United States found itself 
facing an all-out war without an adequate 
rubber stock-pile. And because of the op- 
eration of the I. G. -Standard Oil cartel, 
no effective program for making syn- 
thetic rubber was underway. 1 

Aluminum is another basic product that is es- 
sential for modern warfare. But, here, too, a cartel 
monopoly stood in the way of American develop- 
ment. Even though the United States was the 
greatest user of aluminum in the world, and in spite 
of the fact that its industrial capacity was greater 
than any other nation, in 1942 it was Nazi Germany 
that was, by far, the world's greatest producer of 
this war-essential metal. Alcoa (the Aluminum 

'Sasuly,/. G. Farben, op. cit. t pp. 151, 155. 


Company of America) had a major subsidiary in 
Canada known as Alted, which was an integral part 
of the world aluminum cartel. It was the policy of 
this group to restrict the production of aluminum in 
all nations except Germany — this, probably in 
return for valuable patent rights and promises of 
non-competition in other fields. Even though Alcoa 
never admitted to becoming a direct participant in 
these agreements, nevertheless, the record speaks 
for itself. It did limit its production during those 
years far below the potential market demand. Con- 
sequently, here was another serious industrial 
handicap confronting the United States as it was 
drawn into war. 

The production of the drug atabrine — effec- 
tive in the treatment of malaria — also was hindered 
by the cartel. Quinine was the preferred prescrip- 
tion, but it was entirely controlled by a Dutch 
monopoly which possessed its only source in Java. 
The Dutch company apparently chose not to join 
the international cartel, however, because Farben 
entered into competition by marketing its own drug, 
atabrine, a synthetic substitute. When the Japanese 
captured Java, the United States was totally de- 
pendent on Nazi Germany as a source. Needless to 
say, the cartel did not share the manufacturing 
technology of atabrine with the United States, and 
it took many months after Pearl Harbor before 
American, drug firms could produce an effective 
material. Meanwhile, the first GIs who fought in 
the Pacific Islands suffered immensely from 
malaria with no drugs to treat it — thanks, again to 
the cartel. 


The American development of optical instru- 
ments was another victim of this era. The firm of 
Bausch and Lomb was the largest producer of 
American high-quality lenses of all kinds. Most of 
these lenses were manufactured by the German 
firm of Zeiss. As was the pattern, American tech- 
nology deliberately was retarded by cartel agree- 

We could go on. But these were the major 
products that were critically short or lacking al- 
together when the United States entered the war: 
rubber, aluminum,, atabrine, and military lenses 
such as periscopes, rangefinders, binoculars, and 
bombsights. These were handicaps that, in a less 
productive and resourceful nation, could well have 
made the difference between victory and defeat. 

. Meanwhile, the Nazis continued to enjoy the 
solicitous cooperation of their American cartel 
partners. And they benefited immensely by 
American technology. A document found in the 
captured files of I. G. at the end of the war reveals 
how lop-sided was the exchange. In this report to 
the Gestapo, Farben was justifying its "marriage" 
with Standard Oil, and concluded: 

It need not be pointed out that, without 
lead tetraethyl, modern warfare could not 
be conceived. ... In this matter we did 
not need to perform the difficult work of 
development because we could start pro- 
duction right away on the basis of all the 
experience that the Americans had had 
for years. 1 

l New York Times, Oct. 19, 1945, p. 9. 


American ties to German industry began al- 
most immediately after the guns were silenced in 
World War I. The name of Krupp has become 
synonymous with German arms and munitions. 
Yet, the Krupp enterprises literally were salvaged 
out of the scrap heap in December of 1 924 by a loan 
often million dollars from Hallgarten and Company 
and Goldman Sachs and Company of New York. 

Vereinigte Stahlwerk, the giant Farben- 
controlled steel works, likewise, received over 
one hundred million dollars in favorable long-term 
loans from financial circles in America. 

The 1945 report of the United States Foreign 
Economic Administration concluded: 

It is doubtful that the [Farben] trust could 
have carried out its program of expansion 
and modernization without the support of 
the American investor. 1 

But far more than money went into Nazi Ger- 
many. Along with the loans to German enterprises, 
there also went American technology, American 
engineers, and whole American companies as well. 
Ford is an excellent example. 

As pointed out. previously, the Ford Motor 
Company of Germany was eagerly embraced by 
the cartel. Ford put forty percent of the stock on the 
market, and almost all of that was purchased by 
I. G. Both Bosch and Krauch joined the board of 
directors soon afterward in recognition of their 

l Ibid., p.82. 

WAR GAMES " 291 

)rganization's substantial, ownership interest. But 
veil over half of the company was still owned by the 
"ord family. 

War preparations inside Germany included the 
confiscation or "nationalization" of almost all 
foreign-owned industry. As a result, the Ford 
Company was a prime target. It never, happened, 
however, primarily due to the intercession of Karl 
Krauch, I. G.'s chairman of the board. During 
questioning at the Nuremberg trials, Krauch ex- 

. I myself knew Henry Ford and admired 
him. I went to see Goering personally 
about that. I told Goering that I myself 
knew his son Edsel, too; and I told Goer- 
ing that if we took the Ford independence 
away from them in Germany, it would 
aggrieve friendly relations with American 
industry in the future. I counted on a lot 
of success for the adaptation of American 
methods in German industries, but that 
could be done only in friendly coopera- 

Goering listened to jne and then he said: 
"I agree. I shall see to it that the 
Deutsche Fordwerke will not be incorpo- 
rated in the Hermann Goering Werke." 

So I participated regularly in the 
supervisory-board meetings to inform 
myself about the business processes of 


Henry Ford and, if possible, to take a 
stand for the Henry Ford works after the 
war had begun. Thus, we succeeded in 
keeping the Fordwerke. wgrking and 
operating independently. 1 

The fact that the Nazi war machine had re- 
ceived tremendous help from its cartel partners in 
the United States is one of the roost uncomfortable 
. facts that surfaced during the investigation at the 
end of the war. And this was not just as the result of 
negotiations and deals made before the war had 
started. It constituted direct collaboration and 
cooperation during those same years that Nazi 
troops were killing American soldiers on the field of 

The Ford Company, for example, not only 
operated "independently" supplying military 
hardware in Germany all through the war, but in 
Nazi-occupied France as well. Maurice Dollfus, 
chairman of the board of Ford's French subsidiary, 
made routine reports to Edsel Ford throughout 
most of the war detailing the number of trucks being 
made each week for the German army, what profits 
were being earned, and how bright were the pros- 
pects for the future. In one letter, Dollfus added: 

The attitude you have taken, together 
with your father, of strict neutrality, has 
been an invaluable asset for the produc- 
tion of your companies in Europe. 2 

'DuBois, The Devil's Chemists, op. cit., pp. 247, 248. 
2 lbid., p. 248. 


It was clear that war between the United States 
and Germany made little difference. Two months 
after Pearl Harbor, Dollfus reported net profits to 
Ford for 1941 of fifty-eight million francs. And then 
he said: 

Since the state of war between the 
U.S.A. and Germany, I am not able to 
correspond with you very easily. I have 
asked Lesto to go to Vichy and mail 
this. ... 

We are continuing our production as 
before. . . . The financial results for the 
year are very satisfactory. . . . We have 
formed our African company. . . - 1 

There is no record of Edsel Ford's return 
communications with Dollfus after Pearl Harbor, if 
indeed there were any. It is likely that there were, 
however, in view of the continuing letters that were 
sent by Dollfus. It is also impossible to prove that 
Ford approved of his factories being used to supply 
the same army that was fighting against the United 
States. But there is no doubt about the fact that both 
Dollfus and the German High Command con- 
sidered those factories as belonging to Ford all 
through the war. And that is a circumstance that 
could not have continued for long without some 
kind of friendly assurances "of strict neutrality." 
At any rate, it was one of the curious quirks of war 
that, because of cartel interlock, the Ford Motor 

l Ibid„ p. 251. 


Company was producing trucks for Nazis in both 
Germany and France, producing trucks for the Al- 
lies in the United States, and profiting handsomely 
from both sides of the war. And if the Axis powers 
had won the war, the top men of Ford (as well as of 
other cartel industries) undoubtedly would have 
been absorbed into the ruling class elite of the new 
Nazi order. With close friends like Bosch and 
Krauch they could not lose. 

The Ford Company was not the exception, it 
was the rule. As Stocking and Watkins explained: 

When World War II broke out, I. G. and 
Mitsui on the one hand, and DuPont, 
ICI, and Standard Oil on the other, did 
not completely sever "diplomatic rela- 
tions." Although direct communication 
was disrupted by the war, the companies 
merely "suspended" their collaboration. 
The general understanding was that they 
would take up again at the close of the war 
where they had left off, in an atmosphere 
of mutual concord and cooperation. 1 

The authors are much too cautious in their 
appraisal. The record is painfully clear that the 
heads of those financial interests did not suspend 
their collaboration. They merely made them secret 
and reduced them to the bare minimum. In October 
of 1939, Frank Howard of Standard Oil was in 
Europe for the specific purpose of finding ways to 

Stocking and Watkins, Cartels in Action, op. cit., p. 423. 

, WAR GAMES 295 

keep the Standard-I. G. cartel functioning in spite 
of the war. Howard himself described his mission: 

We did our best to work out complete 
. plans for a modus *vivendi which would 
operate through" the term of the war, 
whether ornot the United States came in. 
[Emphasis added.] 1 , ' 

On June 26, 1940, the day after France capitu- 
lated to the Nazis, a meeting was held at the 
Waldorf-Astoria which brought together some of 
the key American business tycoons who were in- 
terested in protecting their German-based opera- 
tions during the war. The meeting was called by 
Torkild Rieber, chairman of the board of Texaco. 
Among others present were James Mooney, chief 
of General Motors' overseas operations; Edsel 
Ford; executives from Eastman Kodak; and Col. 
Behn, head of ITT. 2 ^ - 

The case of ITT is most instructive. ITT began 
to invest in the Nazi pre-War economy in 1930. It 
formed a holding company called Standard Elek- 
trizitats and then bought another company, Lorenz, 
from Phillips., Seeing that war was rapidly ap- 
proaching, ITT did everything possible to make its 
new holdings look like German companies. Then in 
1928, just as the Nazi troops were preparing to 
march into Poland, ITT, through its ^subsidiary, 
Lorenz, purchased twenty-eight percent ownership 

'Sasuly, /. G. Farben, op. cit,, pp. 149, 150. 

2 Ladislas Farago, The Game of the Foxes, (D. McKay Co., N.Y., 

1972), pp. 463-479. 


of the Focke-Wulf Company, which, even then, 
was building bombers and fighter planes. ITT could 
not claim either ignorance or innocence. They sim- 
ply were investing in war. 

During the course of that war, ITT's plants in 
Germany became important producers of all kinds 
of military communications equipment. They also 
installed and serviced most of the key telephone 
lines' Used by the Nazi government. 

In the United States, ITT was regarded as 
highly patriotic. It developed the high-frequency 
direction finder, nicknamed Huff-Duff, which was 
used to detect German submarines in the Atlantic. 
And Colonel Behn, the head of ITT at the time, was 
awarded the Medal of Merit, the highest civilian 
honor, for providing the Army with land-line 

Anthony Sampson, in his The Sovereign State 
of ITT, summarizes: 

Thus, while ITT Focke-Wulf planes 
werebombing Allied ships, and ITT lines 
were passing information to German 
submarines, ITT direction finders were 
saving other ships from torpedoes. , . . 

In 1967, nearly thirty years after the 
events, ITT actually managed to obtain 
twenty-seven million dollars in compen- 
sation from the American government for 
war damage to its factories in Germany, 
including five-million dollars for damage 
to Focke-Wulf plants — on the basis that 


they were American property bombed by 
Allied bombers. It was a notable reward 
/for a company that had so deliberately 
invested in the German war effort, and so 
carefully arranged to become German. 


If the Nazis had won,*' ITT in Germany 
would have appeared impeccably Nazi; 
as they lost, it re-emerged as impeccably 
American. 1 

It is not within the scope of this study to 
analyze all of the possible motives of the men who 
led us into the two global wars of the Twentieth 
Century. The university student is exposed only to 
the surface of this subject and earns his degree by 
committing to mebory such explanations as an- 
cient rivalries, desire for natural resources, 
militarism, offended national or racial pride, and so 
forth. These factors did play a part, but an ex- 
tremely minor one compared to the financial and 
political goals of the men who, from behind the 
scenes, deliberately set the forces of war into mo- 

War has been profitable to these men in more 
ways than one. True, fantastic profits can be made 
on war production through government-enforced 
monopolies/But those who were the most respon- 
sible also looked upon war as a means of bringing 
about rapid and sweeping political changes in the 
system. The men behind a Hitler, a Mussolini, a 

Sampson, The Sovereign State of-ITT, (Stein & Day, N\Y., 1973), 
pp. 40, 47. 


Stalin, and, yes, even an FDR could recognize that, 
in wartime, the people would be far more willing to 
accept hardship, police-state tactics, the expansion 
of government, and the concentration of power into 
the hands of political leaders than they ever would 
have dreamed of doing in times of peace and tran- 
quility. The concept of big government — and cer- 
tainly the appeal of world government — could not 
have taken root in America except as the outgrowth 
of national crisis. Economic depressions were help- 
ful, but not enough. Sporadic riots and threats^of 
internal revolution were helpful, but not enough. 
War was, by far, the most effective approach. This 
was doubly so in Europe and Asia as one can con- 
firm merely by comparing maps and ruling regimes 
before 1939 and after 1945. As Lenin had predicted, 
the best way to build a "new order" is not by 
gradual change, but by first destroying the old order 
completely, and then building upon the ashes. 1 

The desire for rapid political and social 
change, therefore, can be a powerful motivation 
for war on the part of the finpols who would be the 
direct benefactors'of those changes — especially if 
they were playing their chips oh both sides of the 
field. Yes, war can be extremely profitable for 
those who know how to play the game. 

*It is important to know that Lenin accepted but di&not favor outright 
war as a means of destroying the old order. He claimed that Com- 
munists should work at destruction from within, not from without. 
True to form, during World War II, Soviet troops were not conspicu- 
ous in the fighting except in defense of their own territory, or at the 
close of the war when, with the German army in full retreat, and the 
Japanese army in obvious defeat, they moved rapidly to claim as much 
territory as possible in Eastern Europe and Mongolia. 


Efforts to camouflage Farben 

ownership of firms in America; 

- the repeated assistance rendered 

by various Rockefeller interests; 

the successful penetration into 

the U.S. government by cartel 

agents; and the final disposition 

of the Farben case. 

Once again the reader may be wondering if it is 
really necessary to include all of this history about 
cartels in a study of cancer therapy. And, once 
again : let us state most emphatically that it is. Not 
only does, this history lead us to a clearer under- 
standing later of how the pharmaceutical industry 
has come to be influenced by factors other than 
simple product development and scientific truth, 
but it also gives us the answer to an otherwise most 
perplexing question. That question, often asked at 
the point of first discovering that vitamin therapy is 
the target of organized opposition usually is stated 
something like this: 

"Are you suggesting that people high in gov- 
ernment, in business, or in medicine, could be so 
base aud inhuman as to place their own financiaFor 
political interests above the health and well-being of 

* 299 


their fellow citizens? That they actually would 
stoop so low as to hold back a cure for cancer?" 

The answer, of course, in the light of cartel 
history, is obvious. If prominent citizens^ highly 
respected in their own communities can plan and 
execute global wars, if they can operate slave labor 
camps and gas ovens for the extermination of inno- 
cent human beings, if they can scheme to reap , 
gigantic profits from the war industry of, not only 
their own nation, but of their nation's enemy as 
well, then the answer is, "You'd better believe it!" 

So let us return to the dusty historical record 
for further enlightenment on current events. 

The American cartel partners who attempted 
to conceal their ownership in German industrybe- 
fore the war were hot unique. German interests 
were active doing exactly the same thing in the 
United States. World War I had taught them a 
lesson. During that war, all German-owned indus- 
try in America was seized by the, federal govern- 
ment and operated in trust by the office of the Alien 
Property Custodian. At the end of the war, the 
industries were sold under conditions which, sup- 
posedly, were to prevent them from reverting to 
German control. In the field of chemicals and 
pharmaceuticals, however, this goal was com- 
pletely thwarted. Within a very few years, all of 
these companies were back under Farben owner- 
ship or control even more firmly than before the 
war. / 

One of the key figures in administering the 
disposition of this property was an attorney for the 
Alien Property Custodian's office-by the name of 


Earl McCJintock. Shortly afterward, McGlintock 
was hired (rewarded?) by one of the cartel com- 
panies, Sterling Products, at many times the salary 
he had earned on the government payroll. . 

It was during this period that Farben experi- 
enced its greatest expansion in th$ United States. 
Sterling organized Winthrop Chemical. They 
brought DuPont into half interest of the Bayer 
Semesan Company. The American LG. Chemical 
Company transformed itself several times and, in 
the process, absorbed the Grasselli Dyestuff Com- 
pany, which had been a major purchaser of former. 
German properties. Sterling acquired numerous 
nationally advertised patent "remedies" such as 
Fletcher's Castoria and Phillip' s> Milk of Magnesia. 
With Lewis L. Liggett they formed Drug, Incorpo- 
rated, a holding company for Sterling, Bayer, 
Winthrop, United Drug, and Rexall-Liggett Drug- 
stores. They bought Bristol Meyers', makers of Sal 
Hepatica; Vick Chemical Company; Edward J. 
Noble's Life Savers, Incorporated; and many 
others. By the time the Nazis began to tool up for 
war in Europe, Farben had gained control over a 
major portion of America's pharmaceutical indus- 
try. Investment in both the arts of wounding and 
healing always have been a dominant feature of 
cartel development, for the profit potential is great- 
er in these respected fields than in any other. When 
one wishes to wage a war or regain his health, he 
seldom questions the- price. 

When Farben's Extensive files fell into the 
hands of American troops at the end of World War 
II, they were turned over to the Justice and Treas- 


ury Departments for investigation and analysis. 
One of the inter-office memorandums found in 
those files explained quite bluntly how the cartel 
had attempted to conceal its ownership of Ameri- 
can companies prior to the war.' The memorandum 
states: ' 

After the first war, we came more and 
more to the decision to "tarn" 
[camouflage] our foreign companies . . . 
in such a way that the participation of 
I . G . in these firms was not shown. In the 
* course of time the system became more 
and more perfect 

Protective measures to be taken by I . G . 
for the eventuality of [another] war 
should not substantially interfere with the 
conduct of business in normal times. For 
a variety of reasons, it is of the utmost 
importance . . . that the officials heading 
the agent firms, which £re particularly 
well qualified to serve as cloaks, should 
be citizens of the countries where they 
reside. . . - 1 

This memorandum shed considerable light on 
previous events. On October 30, 1939, the directors 
of American I. G. .(including Walter Teagle of 
Rockefeller's Standard Oil, Charles Mitchell of 

lAmbruster, Treason's Peace, op. cit., p. 89. Also see Sasuly, /. G. 
Farben, op. cit., p. 95, 96. 


Rockefeller's National City Bank, Paul Warburg of 
the Federal Reserve System, Edsel JFord, William 
Weiss, Adolph Kuttroff, Herman Metz, Carl 
Bosch, Wilfried Greif , and Hermann Schmitz, who 
also had been president of American I. G.) an- 
nounced that their company had ceased to exist. It 
had been absorbed by one of its subsidiaries, the 
General Analine Works. Furthermore, the newly 
dominant company was changing its name to the 
General Analine and Film Corporation. The dead 
give-away letters "IG" had vanished altogether. 

Nothing had changed, of course, except the 
name. Exactly the same board of directors had 
served both companies since 1929. Later on, as the 
system to "tarn" became "more and more per- 
fect," Hermann Schmitz was replaced as president 
of General Analine by his brother Dietrich who was 
an American citizen. But even that was too obvi- 
ous, so, by 1941, Dietrich was replaced by easy- 
goifig Judge John E. Mack of Poughkeepsie. Mack 
was not qualified to lead such a giant conglomerate, 
but he easily could be told what to do by those on 
the board and by strategically-placed advisors and 
assistants. His prime value was in his name and 
reputation. Known to be an intimate friend and 
neighbor of President Roosevelt, he brought to 
GAF a brilliant aura of American respectability. 
The obviously German names on the board were 
replaced by names of similar American prestige, 
such as Ambassador William C. Bullitt — men who 
were flattered to be named, but too busy with other 
matters actually to serve. 

As part of the general strategy of camouflage, 


Schmitz turned to his banking expert in Switzer- 
land, Edward Greutert. He formed a Swiss corpo- 
ration called Internationale Gessellschaft fur 
Chemische Unternehmungen A.G., or more com- 
monly referred to as I. G. Chemie. 

T. R. Fehreriba^h, in his The Swiss Banks, 
described the elaborate precautions in this way: 

The best North Atlantic legal firms, with 
offices in London, Paris, Berlin, Amster- 
dam, and Nfcw York, were paid to study 
the problem. These firms had contacts 
- or colleagues in .Basel, Lausanne, 
Fribourg, and Zurich. They got together. 
It was quite simple to plan a succession of 
"Swiss" corporations to inherit licenses, 
assets, and patents owned by certain in- 
ternational cartels. This was to muddy 
the track and to confuse all possible in- 
vestigating governments. 

The transactions themselves were incred- 
ibly complex. . . . Some of them will 
probably never be known in their en- 
tirety. Edward Greutert and his bank, 
and a large number of "desk-drawer" 
corporations formed through Greutert' s 
services, became Schmitz' agents. 

Schmitz, who can only be described as a 
financial wizard, made a weird and won- 
derful financial structure in Basel involv- 
ing a dozen corporations and sixty-five 


accounts in the Greutert Bank. Each ac- 
count was in a different name. Some were 
for the paper corporations, and some 
were in the names of corporation groups 
or syndicates — the European term is 
consortia. These consortia were owned 
by each other*in a never-ending circle, 
and by Greutert and Farben executives. 1 

The final step in this plannecl deception was to 
go through the motions of selling its American- 
based companies to I. G. Chemie. Thus, in the 
event of war, these companies would appear to be 
Swiss owned (a neutral country) and with 
thoroughly American leadership. The phrase 
"going through the motions" is used because all of 
the money received by the American corporations 
as a result of the "sale" was returned almost im- 
mediately to Farben in the form of loans. But, on 
paper, at least, I. G. Chemie of Basel wasoiow the 
official owner of eighty-nine percent of the stock in 
Farben's American companies. 

The entire transaction was handled by 
Rockefeller's National City Bank of New York. 
This is not surprising inasmuch as the head of its 
investment division, Charles Mitchell, also was on 
tjje board of these I. G. holding companies. But 
Rockefeller was far more deeply involved than that. 
In 1938, the Securities and Exchange Commission 
began a lengthy investigation of American I. G. 
Walter Teagle, a member of the board, was called to 

^ehrenbach, The Swiss Banks, (McGraw-Hill, N.Y., 1966), pp. 216, 
219. * / 


the witness stand. Mr. Teagle, recall, was also pres- 
ident of Rockefeller's Standard Oil. Under ques- 
tioning, Mr. Teagle claiirted that he did not know 
who owned control of the company he served as a 
director. He did not know how many shares were 
heldbyl. G.Chemie,orwhoownedI. G.Chemie. 
In fact, he even had the audacity to say that he 
didn't have theslightest idea who owned the block 
of 500,000 shares — worth over a half-a-million 
dollars — that had been- issued in his name! 

Mr. Teagle, of course, was either lying, or 
suffering from a classical case of convenient am- 
nesia. Evidence was introduced later showing that, 
n 1932, he had received a letter from Wilfried 
Greif, Farben's managing director, stating in plain 
English: "I.G. Chemie is, as you know, a sub- 
sidiary of I.G. Farben." 1 

Also brought out in the investigation was the ' 
fact that on May 27, 1930, while Teagle was in 
London, he received a cable from Mr. Frank How- 
ard, vice-president of Standard Oil, carrying this 

In view of the fact that we have re- 
peatedly denied any financial interest in 
American I. G., it seems to me to be 
unwise for us to now permit them to in- 
clude us as stockholders in their original 
listing which is object of present transac- 
tion. It would serve their purpose to issue 

l Ambruster, Treason's Peace, op. cit., p. 1 14. 


this stock to you personally. . . .Will this " 
be agreeable to you as a temporary . 
measure? 1 

' Finally, in June of 1941 , after more than three 
years of intensive investigation, the Securities and 
Exchange Commission abandoned the cause. 
Either because it was utterly baffled by the cartel's 
camouflage (unlikely) or because it yielded to pres- 
sure from the cartel's friends high in government 
(likely), it issued a report to Congress and con-' 

AH attempts to ascertain the beneficial 
ownership of the controlling shares have 
been unsuccessful. ... As a conse- 
quence, the American investors, mainly 
bondholders, are in the peculiar position 
of being creditors of a corporation under 
an unknown control. 2 

The evidence of cartel influence within gov- 
ernment — especially within those agencies of gov- 
ernment that are supposed to prevent these same 
cartels from acting against the best interests of the 
people —should not be passed over lightly. It is, 
unfortunately, a part of the ugly stain that mars and 
obscures the picture of cancer research. So let us 
turn ofur attention now to that aspect of the record. 

The subject is so vast as to permit touching on 

7ta/., p. 114. 
2 Ibid., p. 121. 


only a few highlights. But a good place to begin is in 
1916. It was during that year that Dr. Hugo 
Schwitzer, of the Bayer Company, wrote a letter to 
the German Ambassador von Bernstorff in which 
he spoke of the necessity of bringing about the 
election of a president of the United States whose 
attitude and party politics were in harmony with the 
cause of I.G. Farben and its American partners. It 
was obvious, furthermore, that, at that time, the 
Republican Party was favored for tfiis purpose over 
the Democratic Party. Shortly afterward, inciden- 
tally, Herman Metz, a Tammany leader and life- 
long Democrat, suddenly switched allegiance to the 
Republican Party. HermanMetz also was the pres- 
ident of the H.A. Metz Company of New York, a 
large pharmaceutical house. that was owned and 
controlled by Farben. In 1925, he had helped to 
organize and become president of General Dye- 
stuff Corporation, another Farben outlet. In 1929, 
he had helped to organize the American I.G., and 
he became vice-president and treasurer of that or- 
ganization. The conversion of Metz from a Demo- 
crat to a Republican, therefore, is highly signific- 

In October of 1942, the Library of Congress 
received a sealed gift of some nine thousand letters 
comprising the files of the late Edward T. Clark. 
These files were important because Clark had been 
the private secretary to President Calvin Coolidge. 
On March 4, 1929, Mr. Clark left his position in the 
White House and, in an amazing switch of roles, 
became vice-president and Washington representa- 


tive of Drug, Incorporated, which was, of course, 
the giant Farben combine that pulled together such 
important companies as Sterling and Liggett and 
the multitude of subsidiaries which they owned. 

Mr. Clark undoubtedly earned his pay. That he 
continued to maintain excellent contacts and to ex- 
ercise influence at the highest levels of government 
is beyond doubt. In fact, in August of 1929, Presi- 
dent Herbert Hoover asked him to return to the 
White House as his personal secretary — which he 

Nor was that all, Louis K. Liggett also was in 
Republican politics. As Republican National 
Committeeman from Massachusetts, he was no 
stranger to the intrigue of smoke-filled rooms. 
Working together with Clark and other "men of 
influence," he was able to secure complete ap- 
proval from the Justice Department for the merger 
that created Drug, Incorporated, in 1928, in spite of 
that merger being in direct conflict with the anti- • 
cartel policies established by Congress some years 

Did President Hoover receive the support of 
the cartel because he was a man whose party poli- 
tics were "in harmony" with its cause? It is hard to 
imagine otherwise. While Hoover was Secretary of 
Commerce, he was given the heavy responsibility 
of deciding what to do abput the menace of I.G. 
Farben. To broaden the share of responsibility for 
this decision and to brighten the process with the 
aura of "democracy," he set up a Chemical Advi- 
sory Committee to study the problem and make 


recommendations. This, by the way, has become a 
standard ploy for making the voters think that all 
viewpoints have been melted down into a "consen- 
sus." The committee members always are carefully 
selected so that a clear majority can be counted on 
to "conclude" exactly what was wanted in the first 
place. --" 

If there were ever any exceptions to this rule, 
they certainly did not occur on the Chemical Ad- 
visory Committee. Hoover appointed such men as 
Henry Howard, vice-president of the Grasselli 
Chemical Company, Walter Teagle, president of 
- Standard Oil, Lammot DuPdnt of the DuPont 
Company, and Frank A. Blair, president of the 
Centaur Company, a subsidiary of Sterling Pro- 
ducts. The cartel was in no danger. 

The record of how the cartel succeeded in frus- 
trating the mission of the office of the Alien Prop- 
erty Custodian at the end of World War I is truly 
amazing. There is no clearer proof that the "con- 
spiratorial view of history" is as valid in the Twen- 
tieth Century as it was during the endless intrigue 
and counter-plots of the Old World. Digging into 
the story is like trying to separate a can of worms, 
but here, at least, are the visible and- identifiable 

Francis Garvan had been the Alien Property 
Custodian during World War I. After American 
entry into the war he was instrumental in having all 
German-owned companies taken out of the hands 
of enenty control and held for later sale to American 
business firms. After the war, any Germans who 
could demonstrate that, as private citizens, they 


had been deprived of personal property through this 
action, were to be fully compensated out of the 
proceeds of the sale. But, under no circumstances 
were these industries to be returned to German 
control. That was the firm directive given to the 
APC by Congress. As chronicled previously, how- 
ever, within only a few years after the truce, and 
after Garvan had left government service, every 
one of these major enterprises had reverted to Far- 
ben control. 

Garvan was enraged. He spoke out bitterly 
and publicly against the corruption in Washington 
that made this possible. He sent letters to Con- 
gressmen. He testified before investigating com- 
mittees. He named nam$s. 

He had Jo be silenced. 

Suddenly, in 1929, Garvan found himself as the 
defendant in a suit filed by the Justice Department 
charging malfeasance in the discharge of his duties 
as the Alien Property Custodian! It was a perfect 
case of the best defense being a strong offense, and 
of accusing one's accuser of exactly the things 
which one has done himself. If nothing else, it tends 
to discredit the first accuser and to confuse the 
issue so • badly- that the casual observer simply 
doesn't know whom to believe. 

The prosecution against Garvan was carried 
mainly by two men: Merton Lewis and John Crim, 
both on the staff of the Attorney General's 
office. The most significant thing about these two 
men is that each of them previously had been inti- 
mately involved with the Farben cartel. Lewis had 
been retained as counsel by the Bosch Company in 


1919. Crim had been the counsel for Hays, Kauf- 
man and Lindheim, representing the German Em- 
bassy. (Garvan had sent two members of that law 
firm to jail for treasonous activity during the war.) 

In spite of the carefully planned confusion of 
charges and counter charges, Garvan's testimony 
came through loud, and clear. He had the docu- 
ments, the dates, the inside information that could 
not be brushed aside. Here is what he revealed: 

Herman Metz had made campaign contribu- 
tions to Senator John King, former Republican Na- 
tional Committeeman from Connecticut. 

Before running for* the Senate, John King had 
been on the payroll of the Hamburg American line 
for three years, receiving an annual salary of 
'$15,000 for mysterious, unspecified services. 

King^also had been appointed to the office of 
the Alien Property Custodian through the influence 
of Senator Moses. 

Senator Moses had appointed Otto Kahn as 
treasurer of a: fund for the election of new senators. 

Otto Kahn was the investment partner of Paul 
Warburg, one of the directors of -American I.G. . 

King and Moses together secured the ap- 
pointment of Thomas Miller to the APC. 

Later, Miller was convicted and sent to the 
Atlanta Prison for being an agent of an enemy dur- 
ing wartime. 

Garvan spared no names. His files showed that 
the office of the Attorney General, itself, hlad long 
been considered as the prize of the cartel. Homer 
Cummings, who had been the Attorney General for 
six years, later was employed as counsel for Gen- 


eral Analine and Film at an annual retainer reported 
to be $100,000. 

Garvan testified: 

All that time , the Attorney General of the 
United States . . . and the Alien 
Property Custodian, 'Thomas Miller, 
were in the employ and pay of ^German 
people and had $50,000 worth of U.S. 
Government bonds handed to them and 
put in their pockets by whom? By John T. 
King, the $15,000 representative who 
died three days before he could be 
tried .... 

Some of you saw the other day that 
Senator Moses had appointed Otto Kahn 
as treasurer for the election of new 
senators. You did not associate the fact 
that his friend and partner, Warburg, is 
the head and front gf the American in- 
terest in the American Interessen 
Gemeinschaft ..... 

It is never a dead issue. Peace? There is 
no peace. Always the fight goes on for the 
supremacy in the chemical industry be- 
cause it is the keystone to the safety of the 
United States or of any country in the 
world today. 1 

^mbruster, Treason's Peace, op. cit., pp. 147, 151. 


The three posts in government which naturally 
would be of special interest to cartels are the presi- 
dency itself, the office of Attorney General, and the 
office of Secretary of State. We have touched upon 
the first two. Now let us examine the third. 

Secretary of State John Foster Dulles was the 
leading partner in Sullivan and Cromwell, the 
largest of the law firrtis on Wall Sjreet. Sullivan and 
Cromwell specializes in representing foreign busi- 
ness interests, and its partners hold interlocking 
directorates with many leading corporations and 
banking houses'— especially those comprising the 
Farben-American interlock. 

John Foster Dulles represented Blyth and 
Company, the investment banking partner of the 
First National City Bank and the First Boston Cor- 
poration, two key investment enterprises of the 
Rockefeller group associated with the Chase Man- 
hattan Bank. Dulles also represented Standard Oil 
and was made chairman of the Rockefeller Founda- 
tion, a position signifying great trust on the part of 
the Rockefeller family. Sullivan and Cromwell had 
been the principal representatives of such powerful 
investment houses as Goldman, Sachs, and Com- 
pany, Lehman Brothers., and Lazard Freres, the 
firm that, together with Kuhn, Loeb, and Com- 
pany, had masterminded the expansion and mer- 
gers of ITT. 

As recently as 1945, Dulles had been listed as 
one of the directors of the International Nickel 
Company of Canada. This also was part of the 
Farben interlock and had been the prime mover 


behind the stockpiling of nickel in Nazi Germany 
before the war.* 

Avery, Rockefeller was a director of the J. 
Henry Schroeder Banking Corporation and the 
Schfoeder Trust Company. He also was a" partner 
and stockholder in its affiliate, Schroeder, Rocke- 
feller, and Company. It is not surprising to learn, 
therefore, that John Foster Dulles also had been 
the American representative of the Schroeder 
trust which was Hitler's agent in the United 
States. Westrick had been a Sullivan and Crom- 
well representative in Germany where he rep- 
resented such multi-nationals as ITT. And at the 
beginning of World War II, Dulles became a vot- 
ing trustee. of Farben-controlled American corpo- 
rations in an attempjt to prevent them from being 
seized as enemy property. 

Instead of this man going down in American 
history as a tool of international monopoly, and a 
possible traitor in war, he was appointed as a 
member of a special high-level consulting commit- 
tee established by the Alien Property Custodian to 
formulate the basic policies of that office. And then 
he was chosen by President Eisenhower as Secre- 
tary of State. His brother, Allen Dulles, also a part- 
ner of Sullivan and Cromwell, was equally en- 
meshed in the cartel web as a negotiator with Far- 
ben interests for the Office of Strategic Services in 
Switzerland. (It was then that Allen Dulles had 

William Hoffman, David; Report on a Rockefeller, (Lyle Stuart, Inc., 
N.Y., 1971), pp. 18, 19. Also Ambruster, Treason's Peace, op. cit., p. 


said, "Only hysteria entertains the idea that Ger- 
many, Italy or Japan contemplates war upon us.") 
At the eod of the war, after using his influence to 
protect Hitler's agent, Westrick, 1 he was placed by 
President Eisenhower at the head of the Central 
Intelligence Agency. 

Such is the power of the forces we are here 
describing. , ' 

Perhaps the best way to judge the extent of 
hidden cartel power in the United States govern- 
ment is to observe how its German component 
fared during and after the war. As noted previously, 
its American holdings were seized by the federal 
government in February of 1942. Within a few 
months, all of the original directors and officers 
were compelled to resign. But whom did the gov- 
ernment put in their places? Richard Sasuly an- 

Operating control has passed to a group 
of men who are tied in with a constellation 
of corporate interests which is rising * 
rapidly in American business under the 
leadership of an international financier, 
Victor Emanuel . Emanuel himself sits on 
the board of directors of G . A . & F . There 
is a liberal sprinkling of his associates 
among the other directors and officers. 2 

Emanuel's assumption of leadership over 
I.G.'s holdings in the United States is significant. 

Sampson, The Sovereign State of ITT, op. cit., p. 43. 
2 Sasuly, l.G. Farben, op. cit., p. 186. 


Between 1927 ancU1934, he had been in London as 
an associate of the Schroeder banking interests. 
This is the ^ame organization that, in conjunction 
with the Rockefeller group, represented I.G. and 
became the financial agent of Adolph Hitler. 
Sasuly continues: \ 

; As is well known, the Schroeders of Lon- 
don are related to the Schroeders of 
Germany. Baron Bruno Schroeder is 
credited with having introduced Hitler to 
the principal industrialists of the Ruhr. 
Baron Kurt Schroeder held a high rank in 
the SS and was known as "The SS 
banker." The London banking house, J. 
Henry Schroeder and Company, was 
described by Time magazine" in Julty, . 
1939, as an "economic booster of the 
Rome-Berlin Axis." 2 

And what of Mr. Victor Emmanuel, President 
of Standard Gas and Electric, who dominated the 
* -new" leadership of the Rockefeller- Farben em- 
pire? The answer was provided in one short sen- 
tence in a report of the Securities and Exchange 
Commission dated January 19, 1943. It said: 

The Schroeder interests, in London and 
New York have worked with Emmanuel 
in acquiring and maintaining a dominant 
position in Standard affairs. 1 

l lbid„ p. 187. 

2 Ambruster, Treason's Peace, op. cit., p. 366. 


The much publicized shuffling of G.A.F. di- 
rectors and officers was a charade. Men totally 
loyal to the cartel's interests continued to domi- 
nate. As usual, the American people hadn't the 
slightest inkling of what was really happening. 

What transpired in Germany itself, however, 
is even more revealing of cartel influence at the very 
highest levels qf American government. During the 
later stages of the war, the major industrial cities of 
Germany were levelled by massive bombing raids. 
This was the decisive factor that crippled the Nazi 
war machine and brought the conflict to an end. But 
when the Allied occupational forces moved into 
Frankfort, they were amazed to discover that there 
was one complex of buildings left standing amid the 
rubble and destruction around it. Somehow, these 
and these only had been spared. The buildings, of 
course, housed the international headquarters of 
I.G. Farben. Bombardiers had been instructed to 
avoid this vital target — the very backbone of Nazi 
war production — on the lame excuse that Ameri- 
can forces would heed an office building when they 
moved into town. 

Parenthetically, it should be noted that the 
Under-Secretary of War at that time (promoted to 
Secretary of War in 1945) was Robert P. Patterson 
who, before his appointment by President 
Roosevelt, had been associated with Dillon-Read 
and Company, another Rockefeller investment 
banking firm. Dillon-Read had helpad to finance a 
substantia] portion of Farben's pre-war expansion 
— including Farben's skyscraper office building 


that was spared in the bombing raids. James For- 
restal, former president of Dillon-Read & Co., was 
Secretary of the Navy at the time but later became 
the first Secretary of Defense. If one^were of a 
suspicious nature, one might conclude that men like 
Mr. Patterson and Mr. Forrestal might have used 
their influence to protect some of the assets of their 
company's investment. 

As the Allied aranies pushed into Germany, the 
extent of cartel power within the American 
government suddenly became visible — literally. 
Scores of investment bankers, lawyers, and indus- 
trial executives — all with personal connections 
with the Farben mechanism — showed up in 
brigadier general uniforms to direct the 
"de-Nazification and decartelization" of post-war 

One such figure was Kenneth Stockton, the 
chairman of ITT's European board of directors, 
who, according to Anthony Sampson, appeared 
"alongside Westrick.'.' 1 But the most conspicuous 
among these "generals" was Brigadier General 
William Draper, Commanding Officer of th? 
Economics Division of the Anlerican Control 
Group, which was the division with the greatest 
responsibility for implementing the de-cartelization 
program. And what was Draper's civilian experi- 
. ence that qualified him for this post? He, too, was 
with the Wall Street firm of Dillon and Read, of 

l Op. cit., p. 41. 


In May of 1945, Max Ilgner was arrested and 
held for later trial at Nuremberg. As head of I:G. 's 
international spy network which became the back- 
bone of the Nazi Supreme Command, one might 
think that Ilgner would be concerned over the fu- 
ture. He was not. Shortly after being arrested, he 
wrote a letter to two of his assistants and instructed 
them to keep in close touch with each other and 
with all the other I. G. leaders. He stressed the 
importance of keeping the structure functioning be- 
cause, he said, it would not be much longer before 
the Americans would rembve all restrictions. 1 

He was correct, of course. Within six months 
the cartel's factories were humming with activity. 
I.G. shares were enjoying spectacular confidence 
in the German stock market, and free American 
moniey in the form of the Marshall Plan was on its 

Meanwhile, Colonel Bernard Bernstein, chief 
investigator for the Finance Division of the Allied 
Control Council, and an outspoken critic of Ameri- 
can coddling of cartelists, was fired by his superior 
officers. James Martin, the man who was head of 
the de-cartelization branch of the Department of 
Justice resigned in total disgust. One by one, the 
true foes of entrenched monopoly were squeezed 
out. In anger and frustration, Miller explained his 

We had not been stopped in Germany by 
German business. We had been stopped 
in Germany by American business. . . . 

! Sasuly, l.G. Farben, dp. cit., p. 201. 


We have to enable the government to 
control economic power instead of be- 
coming its tool. 1 

The stage now was set for the -final act of the 
drama. With Farben rapidly returning to its pre-war 
, position of prosperity and influence In Europe, all 
that was left was to release its American homings 
from government control. By this time, I.G. 
Chemie in Switzerland had brightened its image by 
changing its name to French: Societe Inter- 
nationale pour Participations Industrielles et 
Commerciales. In German, however, this trans- 
lated into International Industrie und Handels- 
beteiligungen A.G., or Interhandel, the name by 
which it became widely known. Once again, nothing 
had changed but the name. 

On behalf of Interhandel, the Swiss banks and 
the Swiss government demanded that the United 
States government now release the "Swiss- 
owned" companies. They claimed that Interhandel 
was not owned by German nationals (although they 
steadfastly refused to reveal who did own it), and 
that its American properties had been illegally 
seized. In court, however, the Treasury Depart- 
ment proved — primarily from Farben's own files 
captured in Prankfort — that Interhandel was 
merely the latest name for what Treasury described 

... a conspiracy to conceal, camouflage, 
and cloak the ownership control, and 

Sampson, The Sovereign State of ITT, op. cit., p. 45. 


domination by I.G. Farben of properties 
and interests in many countries of the 
world, including the United States. 1 

The impasse, was finally resolved under the 
Kennedy Administration. Robert Kennedy, the 
president's brother, was the Attorney General at 
the time. He proposed that General Analine be put 
up for sale to the highest-bidder among American 
investment and underwriting houses. The success- 
ful bidder then would be required to offer the stock 
for public sale. Basically, the proceeds were to be 
split between the United States government and the . 
Swiss government, both of which would use the 
money to compensate American, Swiss, and Ger- 
man nationals respectively for losses due to damage 
during the war. 

The proposal was accepted by all parties — as 
well it should have been. As it turned out, all of the 
Swiss share of the proceeds went directly to I.G. 
Farben, and much if not most of the American 
proceeds found its way into the pockets of those 
American fixms which had invested in pre-war 
German industry (such as ITT, previously men- 
tioned). It is not at all impossible that Farben' s 
share of the "sale" found its way right back into the 
New York Stock Exchange, via Swiss banks, 
dummy accounts, and cooperative American cartel 
partners, to reacquire its former possessions. 

The auction took place in March of 1962. It 
was theiargest competitive transaction ever to take 

Quoted by Leslie Waller, The Swiss BankConnection, (Signet Books, 
New American Library, Inc., N.Y., 1972), p. 164. 


place on Wall fc Street. A 225-company underwriting 
syndicate won the sealed bid with a price of over 
$329 million dollars. The victorious bidders were 
represented by — you guessed it — the First Boston 
Corporation and Blyth and Company. Rockefeller 
agents, both! 

Yes, Virginia, the cartel is not dead. It has 
grown. It has prospered. Its center of gravity may 
have shifted away from Frankfort as a result of the 
displacements of war, but it is alive and well in the 
United States of America. 

The conclusion of this drama was well sum- 
marized by Leslie Waller when he wrote: 

Like the legendary phoenix, this colossus 
of business organizations was born in 
fire, yet survives the fiercest flames. It is 
an almost perfect example of corporate 
immortality, based on Swiss banking 
.... Schmitz and Greutert were long 
dead. But thanks to Swiss tenacity, the 
original decision to conceal his holdings 
under the Matterhorn had withstood the 
ravages of war, time, and politics. 1 

The written record of this period of history is 
voluminous. The serious researcher should be 
cautioned, however, not to accept everything he 
reads as feet. In the w^ke of war, there were two 
powerful groups vieing with each other for domi- 
nance within the United States government. One 
was the international financial and industrial con- 

x lbid., pp. 160, 166. 


sortium which is the subject of these chapters. The 
other was the apparatus of international Com- 
munism. Their goals and methods of operation 
were (and are) almost identical, and there was con- 
siderable overlapping and cooperation between 
them. (Algier Hiss, for example, was able to oper- 
ate in both groups with little difficulty.) But just as 
members of a cartel will cooperate with each other 
against the best interests of the general public, yet 
still, maneuver in limited competition between 
themselves for advantage within the cartel, so, also, 
do we find that the Communists and their so-called 
anti-Communist opponents of "monopoly 
capitalism" routinely cooperate with each othet 
against the best interests of the general public, yet 
will fight each other bitterly for dominance within 
the politicalsystems of the world. Consequently, a 
great deal that was written about the evils of Nazi or 
Communist influence after the war was done so 
primarily for propaganda purposes. The Com, 
munists charged that the Nazis were monopoly 
capitalists and that they had strong ties to American 
industrialists and to the American government it- 
self. In this they were correct. But they used this 
truth as a springboard to launch the line that 
monopoly capitalism was synonymous with the 
traditional American system, and that, therefore, 
the system must be overthrown and replaced with 
socialism &nd, ultimately, Communism. In other 
words, they proposed to replace the existing imper- 
fect monopoly with their mo^e perfect monopoly 
known to the peasants simply as Communism. * 


Their cartel opponents, on the other hand, pub- 
licly became outspoken "anti-Cortimunists," and 
wrapped themselves in the stars and stripes of pa- 
triotism. They called for thorough investigations 
and promised to sweep N the Reds and Pinks out 
of the State Department and other branches of gov- 
ernment. They even prosecuted one or two! In 
time, they led the United States into a series of 
limited wars against Communist regimes all around 
the world. (Don't forget, wars are profitable, both 
economically and politically.) But they nfever tried 
to win those wars, for both sides had come to an 
understanding that unlimited competition would 
not be to their mutual advantage. 

This background must be clearly understood if 
one is to make sense out of the flood of books and 
articles that have inundated the American scene 
since World War II . Much truth is to be found in the' 
special pleadings of both sides, but neither side can 
be trusted for either solutions or leadership. If reli- 
able national ot* international leadership should 
ever present itself, it will be recognized by a single 
quality that neither Communism nor Nazism, or 
any other totalitarianism can ever possess. // will 
advocate and promote the drastic reduction of gov- 
ernment. To recognize this leadership, we will not 
have to be political scientists, or philosophers, or 
students of history. By this test alone, we will be 
able to distinguish between the genuine and the 
imitation. And, with this kind of leadership, politi- 
cal conspiracies will be doomed to oblivion. 





A biographical sketch of John D. 

Rockefeller, Sr., including his 

lifelong crusade against . 

competition; the growth of 

Standard Oil; the entry of the 

Rockefellers into the investment 

banking field; the Rockefeller 

influence in the cartelized 

American pharmaceutical 

industry; and an overview of the, 

importance of the Rockefeller 

family in international politics. 

It would be a serious mistake to categorize the 
international cartel that has been the subject of 
these chapters as strictly German. It is abundantly 
clear that the leaders of its component parts, regard- 
less of their nationality, consider themselves as 
internationalists — ,or more accurately, 
supranationalists — with little or no loyalty to the 
country of their birth. Their patriotism is directed 
toward the giant multi-national industrial and 
financial organizations that protect and sustain 




Robert Stevenson, vice-president of the Ford 
Motor Company, is an excellent specimen of these 
new citizens of the world. Business Week magazine 
of December 19, 1970, quotes Stevenson as saying: 

We don't consider ourselves basically an 
American company. We are a multi- 
national company. And when we ap- 
proach a government that doesn't like the 
U.S., we always say, "Whom do you 
like? Britain? Germany? We carry a lot of 

During a television interview in the fall of 1973, 
a top executive of Mobil Oil was even more explicit 
when he said: 

I've never been faced with the situation 
where I'd say to myself I'm only going to 
be a good citizen of one country, because 
if I do that I'm no longer a multi-national 
oil company. 1 

We must keep in mind, also, that a cartel is a 
grouping of interests. While they may act in unison 
in those areas that serve their mutual goals, and 
while there usually is considerable investment in- 
terlocking, and while the trend is leading ultimately 
toward the creation of a single super-giant industrial 
and financial complex that will dominate the 
economic and political life of the entire planet, 

14t Snake Oil From the Oil Companies," Consumer Reports, Feb. 
1974, p. 126. 


nevertheless, its component parts represent group- 
ings within the structure, and quite oftea there is 
fierce competition between them for dominance or 
at least for more favorable relative position within 
the whole. 

The largest and most powerful of these today is 
centered in New York City and is known as the 
Rockefeller group. 

The Rockefeller interest in the profit potential 
of drugs can be traced all the way back to John D. 
Rockefeller's father, William Avery Rockefeller. 
"Big Bill," as he was known to his friends and 
neighbors4n upstate New York, had been a wander- 
ing vendor of quack medicines made up mostly of 
crude oil and alcohol. He had never received any 
medical training, yet, professionally, he advertised 
himself as "Doctor William A. Rockefeller, the 
Celebrated Cancer Specialist" and had himself 
listed as a physician in the local directory. His 
advertising posters read: "All cases of cancer 
cured, unless too far gone, and they can be greatly 
benefited." 1 

"Doc" Rockefeller was a con artist. He 
cheated anyone and everyone any time he could — 
and boasted of it. In-1844 he was accused of horse 
theft. He had been suspected of bigamy. And in 
1849, he was accused of raping the hired girl in the 
Rockefeller household. To avoid prosecution, Big 
Bill moved to Oswego, outside the court's 
jurisdiction. 2 

'John T. Flynn, God's Gold; The Story of Rockefeller and His Times, 
(Harcourt Brace and Co., N.Y., 1932), p. 53- 

2 Hoffman, David; A Report on a Rockefeller, op. cit. t p. 24. 


John D. Rockefeller, in later years, recalled 
with pride and satisfaction, the excellent practical 
training he had received from his father. He said: 

He himself trained me in practical ways. 
He was engaged in different enterprises; 
he used to tell me about these 
things . . . .and he taught me the princi- 
ples and methods of business. 1 ' 

What were these principles and methods of 

business that John D. learned from his father? 

Biographer, John T. Flynn, in his book God's 

kGoIcI; The Story of Rockefeller and His Times, 

provides the answer: 

Big Bill was fond of boasting of his own 
smartness and how he bested 
people .... The man had practically no 
moral code. He would descaitf on his own 
cunning performances for anyone's 
entertainment .... He was what was 
later called a "slicker," and he was fond 
of doing what he could to be sure his sons 
would be "slickers" like himself. 

"I cheat my boys every chance I get," he 
told Uncle Joe Webster. "I want to make 
'em sharp. I trade with the boys and skin 
'em, and I just beat 'em every time I can. 
I want to make 'em sharp." 2 

*Mathew Josephson, The Robber Barons, (Harcourt Brace and Co. 
N.Y., 1934), pp. 45, 46. 
2 Op. cit., p. 58. 


And make 'em sharp, he did, especially John 
D., who went on to become one of the most ruthless 
and most successful monopolists of all time. 

Once again, we must remind ourselves that, in 
spite of all the current rhetoric to the contrary, 
monopoly is not the product of free-enterprise 
capitalism, but the escape from it. John D. Rock- 
efeller himself had confirmed this many times in his 
career. One of his favorite expressions was "Com- 
petition is a sin." 1 

But there was more to it than that. John T. 
Flynn explains: 

His entry into business and his career 
after that would be, in a large measure, 
the story of American economic de- 
velopment and the war on Laissez 
faire .... 

Rockefeller was definitely convinced that 
the competitive system under which the 
WQrld had operated was a mistake. It was 
a crime against order, efficiency, 
economy. It could be eliminated only by 
abolishing all rivals. His plan, therefore, 
took a solid form. He would bring all his 
rivals in with him. The strong ones he 
would bring in as partners. The others 
would come in as stockholders .... 
'Those who would not come in would be 
crushed. 2 

Hoffman, Op. cit., p. 29. 
2 Op. cit., pp. 23,221. 


The present structure of the Rockefeller em- 
pire is living proof of the success of this plan. John 
D., Senior, had a number of close business as- 
sociates. Some originally were partners. Most were 
defeated rivals who had been brought into the struc- 
ture. All of these men became multi-millionaires, 
and most of their descendents have remained 
closely linked with the Rockefeller family. Whether 
intermarriages were arranged as "unions of con- 
venience,' ' as were common among the ruling class- 
es of Europe, or were the result of love, the result 
has been the same. The Rockefeller biological (and 
stockholder) strain has intermingled in an almost 
unbroken line through half of the nation's wealth- 
iest sixty families and back again. Throughout it 
all, the aggregate is solidly controlled, economi- 
cally at least, by the one family that constitutes the 
descendents of John D. Rockefeller, the First. 

It is nearly impossible for an outsider to esti- 
mate the true wealth and power of the Rockefeller 
family today. But even a casual survey of the visible 
portion of its vast empire is enough to stagger the 

The Rockefellers first established an oil 
monopoly in the United States in the 1 870's . In 1 899 
this oil trust was reorganized as the Standard Oil 
Company of New Jersey. In 1911, as a result of a 
decision of the Supreme Court, Standard Oil was 
forced to separate into six separate companies 
— supposedly to break up the monopoly. This act 
did not, of course, accomplish its objective. The 
many "independent" companies that resulted con- 
tinued to be owned — and in many cases even 


run — by the same men. None of them ever engaged 
in serious competition between themselves, and 
certainly not against Standard Oil of New Jersey, 
which continued to be Rockefeller's main holding 

In the years following 1911, 'the Rockefellers 
returned to their original policy of acquiring other 
oil companies that, in the public eye, were "inde- 
pendent." Consequently, the Rockefeller family 
obtained either control over or substantial financial 
interest in such vast enterprises as Humble Oil 
(now called Exxon), Creole Petroleum, Texaco, 
Pure Oil, and others. Most of these companies con- 
trol a staggering maze of subsidiaries that operate in 
almost every nation of the world. All-in-all, Stan- 
dard Oil of New Jersey admits to outright control 
over three hundred and twenty-two companies. 1 In 
addition, Rockefeller established cartel links 
through investments in many foreign "com- 
petitors." These included Royal Dutch (Shell Oil) 
and a half interest in the Soviet NobeLOil Works. 

What influence the Rockefellers exert through 
their oil cartel, as impressive as it is, is peanuts 
compared to what they have accomplished in later 
years through the magic of international finance and 
investment banking. 

That part of the story begins in 1891 when the 
First National City Bank of New York, under the 
presidency of James Stillman, became the main 
bank of the Rockefeller family. With the addition of 
the Rockefeller deposits, the bank became the 
largest in the country. 

'Hoffman, Op. cit., pp. 151, 152. 


The Rockefellers sooil became interested in 
banking and banking monopolies as a means of 
making money with even greater potential than oil 
monopolies. Two sons of William Rockefeller, 
John's brother, maHed daughters of James Still- 
man, and the Rockefeller-Stillman interlock was 
forged. Later, the family of John D. Rockefeller 
moved most of its financial interests to a bank of 
their own, but the descendents of Wjlliam Rockefel- 
ler became, and continue to be, the majority 
shareholders in, and thus the owners of, the First 
National City Bank, which has become one of the 
largest financial institutions in the world. In fact, as 
stated in its annual report for 1953: 

Of the hundred largest non-financial cor- 
porations in the country, ninety-five have 
accounts with our bank. Our correspon- 
dent banking relationships are similarly 
wide. All of the hundred largest banks in 
the country outside New York City main- 
tain accounts with us. 

When the family of John D, Rockefeller left the 
First National City Bank, it was not because of 
dissatisfaction or an internal struggle for control. It 
was merely to absorb the competition — the hall- 
mark of all monopoly business moves. First they 
established their own bank known as the Equitable 
Trust. Then they bought up the Chase National 
Bank. Meanwhile, the* International Acceptance 
Corporation, a bank owned by Kuhn, Loeb, and 
Company, had merged into the Bank of the Man- 


hattan Company. And it was this that was absorbed 
in 1955 by the Rockefeller's Chase National Bank 
resulting in the largest banking firm in the world: 
The Chase Manhattan. 

How big is the Chase Manhattan Bank? No 
one on the outside really knows. We do know,' 
however, that it is more like a sovereign state than a 
business firm. It has far more Money than most 
nations. It has over fifty-thousand banking officers 
serving as ambassadors all around the world. It 
even employs a full-time envoy to the United Na- 
tions, for whom it serves as banker. 1 

The words "investment banks" or "invest- 
ment houses" have been used several times within 
this discourse, and it is advisable to clarify their 
meaning. Before 1933, banking firms in the United 
States operated in two areas of activity . They hand- 
led the commercial checking accounts and deposits 
of individuals and corporations, an area of activity 
known as commercial banking; and they also rep- 
resented clients who were buying or selling stocks 
and bonds in various corporate enterprises, an area 
of activity known as investment banking. 

In 1933, however, in response to public alarm 
over the growing concentration of economic power 
into the hands of fewer and fewer banking dynas- 
ties, a law was passed which required commercial 
banks to divest themselves ofall investment bank- 
ing operations. The banks complied, but the result 

lr The U.N. always has been a pet project of the Rockefeller family. 
They even donated the land on which the U.N. building now stands. 
It's likely that they view the U.N. as the ultimate mechanism for the 
enforcement of monopoly power throughout the entire world, a role for 
which it is admirably structured. 


was not what the voters had in mind. Separate 
investment banking firms were established, but 
they were owned by exactly the same people who 
also owned the commercial banks; and, as a result 
of the mergers that took place in the wake of this 
legislation, the end product was fewer firms and, 
thus, greater concentration of power than ever be- 

. For the Chase Manhattan group there was now 
an investment firm called the First Boston Corpora- 
tion. And for the National City Group there was 
Harriman, Ripley, and Company and Blyth and 
Company. Others — such as Dominick and 
Dominick, and Dillon, Read, and Company — 
soon were to be added to the interlock as the power 
of the Rockefeller empire expanded. With the for- 
mation of the First Boston Corporation, for exam- 
ple, the powerful Mellon family threw in its lot with 
the Rockefeller family, and about the only substan- 
tial block that was not yet united into a single 
monolithic banking structure was the family of J. P. 
Morgan, although even they cooperated in many 
joint projects, such as the Federal Reserve 
System. 1 

With the growth of these investment banking 
institutions in the United States, New York has^ 
become the new focal point of world finance. SwiK 

Contrary to popular belief, the Federal Reserve System — the entity 
that has complete control over the creation of money in the United 
States — is neither owned nor run by the government. It is privately 
owned by the banking interests that are the subject of these passages. 
For more details on that aspect of monopoly — monopoly over the 
money system, itself — read The Capitalist Conspiracy; An Inside 
View of International Banking, by G. Edward Griffin, (American 
Media, Thousand Oaks, California, 1971). 


zerland, in spite of the unique role it plays because 
of its bank secrecy and numbered accounts, cannot 
begin to compare with the money volume and 
power now centered in the United States. The 
American assets of any one of the multi-national 
corporations built around Standard Oil, ITT, Ford, 
or General Motors, far exceed the total assets of 
many nations of the world. ITT has more em- 
ployees overseas than does the State Department. 
Standard Oil has a larger tanker fleet than the Soviet 
Union. IBM's research and development budget is 
larger than the total tax revenue of all but a handful 
of countries. While it is true that a great deal of 
foreign money does find its way into Swiss banks, 
there still is more money and real wealth inside the 
United States than in most of the rest of the world 
combined. Furthermore, a substantial portion of 
this wealth is concentrated into the hands of the 
financial and industrial cartelists in New York. 

One percent of the population owns more than 
seventy percent of the nation's productive prop- 
erty, and ten percent own all of it. 1 About half of 
this, in turn, is held in trust by the ten leading Wall 
Street banks, which, in turn, are heavily influenced, 
if not controlled outright, by a group so small that 
they could be counted on the fingers of one hand. 
This, stated in plain English, represents the greatest 
and most intense concentration of wealth and 
power that the world has ever seen. 

How did this come about? Was it the product 
of free-enterprise? Was it the result of providing 
needed goods or services at competitive prices, 

'Lundberg, The Rich and the Super Rich, op. cit., p. 461. 


thus, capturing a larger share of the free market? 
Was it the consequence of mass production and 
distribution methods that drove down the selling 
price of goods to the point where they became at- 
tractive to more and more consumers? Each of 
these factors may have played a small part in the 
process, but, to whatever extent they did, it was 
infinitesimal compared to the larger role. played by 
the guaranteed super profits that resulted from sim- 
ply eliminating one's competition. 

The apologist for cartelized industry and 
finance usually attempts to refute this fact by citing 
the profit figures for these enterprises each year. 
The picture they draw is modest, indeed, with an 
average profit of from three to seven percent. This 
isn't enough even to keep up with inflation, so obvi- 
ously, tliefinpols, somehow are doing a lot better 
than that. But how? 

The answer is in something^ known as "profits 
of control" — the profits that fall to those who 
control an enterprise, These are not the same as the 
profits paid to mere stockholders (investors of risk 
capital), the profits that make up the modest bal- 
ance cheet so often displayed in defense of car- 
telized industry. The profits of control are derived 
from such things as advance inside information that 
enables one to make a killing on the stock market, 
extremely profitable delayed stock options, hand- 
some fees for special services rendered, cross- 
breeding of high-profit contracts with affiliated 
companies, multi-million dollar loans at unnaturally 
high or low interest rates, depending on the direc- 


tion of the advantage, and similar devices. All-in- 
all, the profits of control can run anywhere from 
fifty percent to many thousands of percent, depend- 
ing on how small a margin of capital is required to 
control the total. 

This is an interesting study in itself. Many peo- 
ple are of the opinion that it takes fifty-one percent 
ownership to control a corporation. Nothing could 
be further from the truth. While this may be true of 
small companies whose stock is held by a handful of 
people, the extremely large multi-billion dollar 
companies can be — and are — controlled by as 
little as five to ten percent of the total stockholders . 1 

The mechanics by which it is possible for an 
extreme minority to hold control — and thus the 
orofits of control — of the super-giant industries are 
fascinating. They include all the usual tricks of busi- 
ness — such as proxy battles and social pressure on 
members of the board — plus most of the tactics of 
ill-out war as well. They also include use of hidden 
lilies from other countries who may own small but 
substantial blocks through numbered accounts in 
Swiss banks. But the greatest weapon of all is the 
powerful leverage they can obtain through .their 
:ontrol of large blocks of stock that are held indi- 
ectly by them as part of the investment portfolios 
)f the financial institutions they also control. 

A life insurance company, for instance, is the 
epository of many millions of dollars that, in 
heory, belong to the policy-holders. Most insur- 

This is the unanimous opinion of experts in the field of high finance. 
See the New York Times, Nov. 7, 1955; also Lundberg, op. cit., p. 270; 
dso Hoffman, op. cit., pp. 6, 7; and others. 


ance policies are a mixture of real insurance and a 
savings program. The money that goes into savings 
typically is invested in a broad spectrum of indus- 
try, but most of it is put into the "blue chip" stocks 
of the largest corporations. This stock does not 
belong to the owners of the company; but the own- 
ers of the company — or, to be more exact, the 
extreme minority of owners who control the com- 
pany — exercise the right to vote that stock just the 
same as if they owned it all. In this way, a minority 
in control of a financial institution can multiply its 
influence and power by a factor many hundreds of 
times greater than its own capital investment would 
suggest. This is the "magic" of investment bank- 
ing, and explains why the leaders of Wall Street's 
great financial cartels are, historically, at the sum- 
mit of the industrial empires of the United States. 
The Rockefeller group has become the 
nation's leading practitioner of this kind of magic. 
In addition to the billions of dollars worth of other 
people's industrial stocks which it controls through 
the trust departments and trust companies affiliated 
with its commercial banking operations, in addition 
to the billions controlled in the same way through its 
investment banking firms, and in addition to the 
megalithic blocks of stock held in trust by the varir 
ous Rockefeller foundations, it also has control 
over the vast stock holdings of both the Metropoli- 
tan and Equitable life insurance companies, the first 
and third largest in the United States. Historically, 
the Traveler's and Hartford insurance companies 
also have been within the Rockefeller orbit through 


such top executives as J. Doyle DeWitt and Eugene 
Black, both directors of Chase Manhattan Bank. 

Reaching downward through this pyramid of 
power, the Rockefeller group has managed to place 
its representatives into controlling positions on the 
boards of a wide cross-section of industry. These 
include the following better known firms: Allied 
Chemical, American Tobacco, Anaconda, Armour 
and Company, ATT, Bethlehem Steel, Bulova 
Watch, Burlington Industries, Commercial Sol- 
vents Corporation,. Continental Can, Cowles Pub- 
lications, Data Control, Florida East Coast Rail- 
road, Ford Motor, General Electric, General 
Foods, General Motors, Getty Oil, B.F. Good- 
rich, Hearst Publications, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, 
International Harvester, ITT, Kennecott Copper, 
Litton Industries, Minute Maid, National Lead, 
New York Central Railroad, Pan American Air- 
ways, Penn Central, Polaroid, RCA, Sears, Shell 
Oil, Singer, Southern Pacific Railroad, Time-Life 
Publications, U.S. Rubber, U.S. Steel, Virginian 
Railroad, Western Union, and Westinghouse — to 
name just a few! 

In the specialized field of drugs and phar- 
maceuticals, the Rockefeller influence is substan- 
tial, if hot dominant. When David Rockefeller 
spoke before the Investment Forum in Paris, he 
said that it was wise to invest in "life and risk 
insurance companies, business equipment com- 
panies, and companies benefitting from research 
into drugs." 1 

'Hoffman, op. cit., p. 185. 


That he has followed his own advice is a matter 
of record. 

The Rockefeller entry into the pharmaceutical 
field is more concealed, however, than in most 
other categories of industry. The reason for this 
appears to be two-fold. One is the fact that, for 
many years before World War II, Standard Oil had 
a continuing cartel agreement not to enter into the 
broad field of chemicals except as a partner with 
I.G. Farben which, in turn, agreed not to compete 
in oil. The other is that, because of the unpopularity 
of Farben in this country and the need to 
camouflage its American holdings, Standard had 
concealed even its partnership interests in chemical . 
firms behind a maze of false fronts and dummy 
accounts. The Chase Manhattan Bank; however, 
always has been the principal stock registrar for 
Farben-Rockefeller enterprises such as Sterling 
Drug,. Olin Corporation, American Home Pro- 
ducts, and General Analine and Film. When 
Farben's vast holdings were finally sold in 1962, the 
Rockefeller group was the dominant force in carry- 
ing out the transaction. One can safely assume, 
therefore, that, if there was any way to benefit from 
inside information or to place a minority into a 
position to reap the profits of control, the Rockefel- 
ler group did so. Consequently, it is difficult for an 
outsider to separate the pure Rockefeller control 
from that which is shared by I.G. Farben or its 
descendents. That it constitutes a major power 
center within the pharmaceutical industry, how- 
ever, cannot be denied. 


The profit potential in drugs is enormous. The 
very nature of the product lends itself perfectly to 
monopoly and cartel controls. When a person is ill 
or is dying, he does not question the price of a drug 
offered to him for relief. This is especially true if the 
drug is recommended by his physician and is avail- 
able only through a prescription. The mystique of 
that procedure eliminates all competition between 
brands. Profits can be extremely high — not so much 
to the physician or the druggist — but for the firms 
that manufacture the drugs. 

It is more than possible that this is the primary 
reason for the 1974 rulings requiring all but the . 
weakest potency vitamins to be available only 
through a physician's prescription. Price and brand 
competition in vitamins simply had to be stopped. 
The large pharmaceutical firms supported the ruling 
because they knew that their existing contacts with 
druggists would make them the favored suppliers. 
This would put the smaller manufacturers out of 
business, leaving the field clear for the cartel. They 
also knew that, because prescriptions were to be 
required, the prices eventually could be moved up- 
ward with little chance of consumer complaint. It 
was merely another example of using the power of 
government to eliminate competition and increase 
costs to the consumer. 

Here again is one of those road signs along the 
way reassuring us that we have not become lost in a 
maze of meaningless information that has no bear- 
ing on cancer therapy and cancer research. Al- 
though many otherwise well informed persons are 


totally unaware of it, cartels do exist. They have 
completely dominated the chemical industry for 
decades. The pharmaceutical industry, far from 
being exempt from this influence, has been at the 
center of it from the very beginning. We are travel- 
ling this long path of historical inquiry for the reason 
that one simply cannot evaluate the broad opposi- 
tion to vitamin therapy without an awareness of 
these facts. 

It has been observed that almost every head of 
state that ^visits the United States pays a personal 
visit to the head of the Rockefeller empire. In more 
recent years this has included visits to David Rock- 
efeller by such personages as the Emperor of Japan 
and the Premier of the Soviet Union. And when 
Rockefeller travels to foreign lands, he always is 
accorded a royal welcome of the caliber usually 
reserVed for heads of state. Yet, the American peo- 
ple generally do not consider the Rockefellers to be 
that important. As Ferdinand Lundberg observed: 

There apparently is a difference of-opin- 
ion between foreign leaders . . . and the 
- American public about the precise status 
of the Rockefellers. Can it be that the 
. foreign political sharks, as they muster 
out the palace guard and the diplomats to 
greet them, are mistaken? My own view 
of them accords with that of the foreign- 
ers. The finpols (financial politicians) 
are ultra bigwigs, super-megaton big- 
shots, Brobdingnagian commissars of af- 


fairs. In relation to them the average 
one-vote citizen is a muted cipher, a 
noiseless nullity, an impalpable phantom, 
a shadow in a vacuum, a subpeasant. 1 

Perhaps the reason that Americans do not re- 
gard the Rockefellers as the "Brobdingnagian 
commissars" that they really are is because, like 
their Farben counterparts in Nazi Germany, they 
have wisely chosen to stay in the background. They 
are seldom in the news and are overshadowed by 
the public appearances and pronouncements of the 
nation's political figures. But this, too, is according 
to formula. The men who sit at the pinnacle of this 
world power prefer to leave the time-consuming 
and fruitless publicity-seeking to their political sub- 
ordinates who, by temperament, are more suited to 
the task. The amount of power held by a John or a 
David Rockefeller may not be as great as that held 
for a single instant by a president of the United 
States. By comparison, however, the president is 
but a passing comet doomed to eventual oblivion. 

Political figures come and go. Some are re- 
vered in the history books of their nation. Some are 
tried as war criminals. Others are assassinated. 
Most merely are cast aside when they have outlived 
their usefulness. But the power of the Rockefellers 
is handed down from generation 4o generation as a 
title of nobility and has become a living, growing, 
nearly immortal reality of its own. 

l Op. cit., p. 21. 





A preview of the drug cartel's 

influence over the curricula 

taught within the nation's medical 

schools; the drug-oriented 

training given to all medical 

students; the philanthropic 

foundation as a special creation 

of carte lists to avoid payment of 

taxes; and the use of the 

foundation to obtain control over 

educational institutions. 

As we have seen, the Rockefeller group, in 
conjunction with the hidden hand of I.G. Farben, 
has become a dominant influence in the American 
pharmaceutical industry. One of the more obvious 
consequences of this reality is that one almost never 
finds consumer price competition in the broad and 
lucrative field of prescription drugs and patent 
medicines. The only competition generally allowed 
is along the basis of vague and meaningless adver- 
tising claims such a^ "Laboratory tests prove that 
Bayer is higher quality," or "Research has shown 
that Anacin is faster." Over the years, the major 



pharmaceutical houses have lived up to an agree- 
ment to stay within the narrow field of their spe- 
cialty and to refrain from trying to. cut into the 
established markets of their rivals. It is, as they say, 
an "orderly" industry. 

One of the reasons for this, of course, is that 
some drugs are patented and are available only from 
one manufacturer. Another reason is that the pre- 
scription is madejby a physician who properly is 
more concerned with the effectiveness of a drug 

. than with its price. But, in addition to these, there is 
the fact that the drug houses bombard the market 

y with so many new drugs each year that the physi- 
cian often does not know how effective are the 
drugs he prescribes. All he knows is that he has 
seen them advertised in the AMA Journal, has been 
handed a "fact sheet" by a detail man representing 
the company which manufactures the drugs, and 
may have had some limited or qualified success 
with them on a few of his previous patients. Be- 
cause he is a practitioner, not a researcher, he 
cannot conduct controlled experiments to deter- 
mine the relative effectiveness of the new drugs as 
compared to the old or with similar drugs available 
through another drug firm. All he knows is that they 
seem to help some of his patients. If the first drug 
does not bring about the desired results, then he will 
issue a new prescription and try something else. 
The end result is that it is not unusual for a patient to 
end up buying and trying several drugs from several 
manufacturers with everybody getting a piece of the 
financial action. 


This point was brought home quite bluntly at a 
conference on medical drugs sponsored in 1963 by 
Johns Hopkins University. One of the featured 
speakers was Dr. George Baehr of New York, who 

As a consultant for many years to physi- 
cians in private practice, it has been my 
experience that many general practition- 
ers and specialists have acquired the 
habit of shifting repeatedly and need- 
lessly from one drug to another. They are 
usually motivated to change their pre- 
scribing habits by the persuasive prop- 
aganda of advertising literature and of vis- 
iting detail men. 1 

There. is nothing about this procedure, of 
course, which is improper from the physician's 
point of view. He is doing only what he can to help 
his patients by making available to them what he 
has been told is the latest technology in the field of 
drugs. Remember it is not he who makes a profit 
from writing the prescription. 

There is no questioning the fact that the~ doctor 
serves as an extremely effective salesman for a 
multi-billion dollar drug industry, but he is not paid 
for this vital service. He has been trained for it, 
however. Through the curricula within the nation's 
leading medical schools, students are exposed to 
such an extensive training in the use of drugs (and 

^mar Garrison, The Dictocrats, op. cit. x p. 21. 


practically none in the field of nutrition) that, upon 
graduation, they quite naturally turn to the use of 
drugs as the professional treatment of choice for 
practically all of man's ills. 

How the medical schools of the nation came to 
adopt these uniform curricula is the subject to 
which we now turn our attention. 

The key to unlock this particular door of cartel 
intrigue is the tax-exempt foundation. The scope of 
this study does not permit more tha ! n a cursory 
review of the origins and early history of such foun- 
dations, but the salient points are these: 

The Federal Reserve System, the income tax, 
and the tax-exempt foundations all were conceived 
and foisted onto the American people by the same 
financier-politicians whose story has been traced in 
the preceding pages. In fact, the Federal Reserve 
System was first introduced as legislation in 1 9 1 3 by 
Senator Nelson Aldrich, and was known as the 
"Aldrich Plan." Aldrich was brought into the inner 
circle when his daughter married John D. Rockefel- 
ler, Jr. The senator's son, Winthrop. Aldrich, be- 
came chairman of the Chase National Bank. 
Senator Aldrich was widely recognized as 
Rockefeller's personal representative in the Senate 
and, as a result, he wielded far more power and 
influence in Washington than any other senator of 
the era. One thing is certain. He would not have 
introduced income tax legislation if there were even 
the remotest chance that it would apply to such 
fortunes as those held by the Rockefellers, the 
Morgans, the Carnegies, or the Mellons. 


The plan was both simple and ingenious. They 
vould transfer the bulk of their visible' assets to 
omething called foundations. They would appoint 
land-picked and loyal underlings to administer 
hese foundations. They would require that a por- 
ion of their assets be dijspersed under the appear- 
tnce of charity or philanthropy. They would de- 
sign most of those gifts, however, to benefit them- 
selves, their business enterprises, or to further their 
>olitical objectives. They would retain full control 
)f their assets and use them just as freely as if they 
emained directly in their name. They would retain 
he option of terminating the foundations and re- 
claiming their assets at any time it would be advan- 
ageous to do so. They would completely avoid the 
>ayment of any inheritance tax upon the death of 
he "donor," thus insuring that the fortune re- 
named intact and in the hands of family or corpo- 
ate control in perpetuity. And they would use the 
supposedly charitable nature of the foundation as a 
neans of avoiding the payment of most, if not all, of 
he income tax they then were advocating to be paid 
>y everyone else. 

Once again it must be noted that the 
'socialist" or "communist" nostrums allegedly 
lesigned to pull down the rich and elevate the poor 
- such as the progressive income tax 1 — always 
vork, first, to eliminate the middle class and, ulti- 
nately, to produce just the opposite of their adver- 

The progressive income tax was specifically called for in The Com- 
lunist Manifesto. 


tised objective. That this has been true in the Unit- 
ed States is obvious. The progressive income tax 
has not hurt the finpols one bit. Their wealth ex- 
pands at an ever-increasing rate each year. The 
business and professional men who fall into the 
broad middle class, however, now are effectively 
blocked from rising into the selected ranks of the 
super-rich. With each passing decade since the 
enactment of the income tax, the gap widens be- 
tween the top and the bottom. Again, government 
becomes the instrument for preventing competitor 
and for preserving monopoly. 

And make no mistake about it, it was planned 
that way. 

Ferdinand Lundberg agrees: 

Recipients of the money must be ideolog- 
ically acceptable to the donors. There is a 
positive record showing that, by these 
means, purely corporate elements are 
able to influence research and many 
university policies, particularly in the 
selection of personnel .... The founda- 
tions are staunch supporters of the physi- 
cal sciences, the findings of which have 
many profit-making applications in the 
corporate sphere. . . . 

Whether or not these various effects were 
sought by the foundation creators, they 
are present, and the realistic observer 
must suppose they were what the realistic 
founders had in mind. 1 

'The Rich and The Super Rich, op.cit., p. 469. 


It should be noted in passing that what has 
been true in university research is equally true in 
government research. In both cases the phar- 
maceutical interests are able to benefit commer- 
cially from extensive drug research programs paid 
for wholly or in part by tax dollars. This reality was 
clearly demonstrated in 1972 by Dr. Frank 
Rauscher, director of the National Cancer Insti- 
tute, when he said: 

We test about 30,000 compounds a year 
for anti-tumor activity in animals at the 
National Cancer Institute alone. Each 
year, for the past four or five years, an 
average of about three new drugs have 
reached the physician's bag for applica- 
tion to the patient. 

The program currently costs about 75 
million dollars per year, and can be ex- 
pected to generate six or seven clinically 
effective drugs each year. That means 
we're spending tax money at about the 
rate of 10 million dollars per drug .... 
My colleagues, Dr. Gordon Zubrod and 
Dr. Saul Schepartz, operate probably the 
nation's biggest pharmaceutical house at 
the National Cancer Institute. 1 

In recent years, the private physician has rep- 
resented a constantly shrinking portion of the total 

14 *New Gains in War Against Cancer," U.S. News and World Report, 
Dec. 4, 1972, p. 41. / 


medical profession. As his influence wanes, he is 
being superseded by group clinics, state-supported 
institutions, and research centers. Many of these 
are the recipients of large grants for specific medical 
projects, and they become extremely sensitive to 
the ideological or scientific preferences of those 
who give the money. It's not that the donors tell 
them specifically what to do or what to find, it's just m 
that the recipients know in advance that, if they 
stray too far outside the unstated but clearly under- 
stood objectives of those who make the grant, then 
that will be the last time their name is on the roll call 
when the free money is given out. 

There is the celebrated case, for instance, of 
the $ 15,000 grant from the Carnegie Endowment for 
International Peace to the American Bar Associa- 
tion to study the United Nations Genocide Con- 
vention. When the ABA had the gall to condemn 
the convention, the Carnegie Foundation was en- 
raged and demanded an immediate stop to the pro- 
ject or its money back. 1 

Another example of the influence of founda- 
tions over the world of academia is the way in which 
the nutrition department of Harvard has been con- 
verted into "the public relations department of the 
General Foods Corporation. For years the head of 
this department at Harvard has been Professor 
Stare, knawn among health food circles as the 
"Cornflakes Professor." One of Professor's dubi- 
ous achievements has been to defend "enriched" 

'"Bar Group Accused by Carnegie Fund," New York Times, Oct. 15, 
1950, pp. 1, 66. Also "Bar Group Denies Peace Fund Misuse, ~New 
York Times, Oct. 20, 1950, p. 30. . 


/hite bread and other miracle products of the pro- 
essed food industry. He repeatedly dismisses as 
rubbish" and "nutritional quackery" all sugges- 
ions that chemical additives to foods may not be 
afe or that processed supermarket foods are not 
jst as nutritious as anything fresh from an organic 
arden. On one occasion he condemned Dr. Carl- 
3n Fredericks for his support of vitamin Be and 
hallenged him to produce even one authoritative 
eference to support its value. Whereupon Dr. 
7 redericks sent Stare's own report on Be written 
ears before he had come under the influence of 
iarvard and foundation money. 1 

Omar Garrison gives us further insight into 
ow this influence came to be decisive: 

Perhaps it is without significance that Dr. 
Stare is a board member of a large can 
company, and that his department at 
Harvard has been the recipient of sub- 
stantial research grants from the food in- 
dustry. For example, in 1960, the Har- 
vard president announced what he called* 
a "momentous" gift of $1,026,000 from 
General Foods Corporation, to be used 
over a ten-year period for expansion of 
the nutritional laboratories of the 
university's school of public health, 
where Dr. Stare is professor of nutrition. 
The seductive question is: Can any 
scientific research remain wholly objec- 

Oetails in a lecture by Dr. Carlton Fredericks, National Health Fed- 
ration Convention, Los Angeles, Jan. 16, 1972. 


tive and untainted by loyalty when it is so 
- generously endowed by big corporations 
whose commercial future will be 
influenced by the outcome of such 
research? 1 

Joseph Goulden, in his authoritative study o 
foundations entitled The Money Givers, explain 
how foundation control has been extended to th 
medical profession: 

The medical profession does quiver ex- 
citedly when it hears the fast riffle of 
thousand dollar bills. Since Ford 
[through the Ford Foundation] began 
nationwide operations in 1950, it has' 
spent more than a third of a billion dollars 
on medical schools and hospitals .... 

Foundations are popular with the medical 
establishment because they do so much 
to preserve it. A well-endowed regional 
foundation — Kellogg in Michigan, 
Moody in Texas, Lilly in Indiana — can 
be as influential in hospital affairs as is the 
state medical association, through grants 
for construction, operating expenses, and 
research. 2 

l The Dictocrats, op. cit., pp. 195, 196. 

2 Goulden, The Money Givers, (Random House, N.Y., 1971), pp. 14 


Bearing in mind that the foundations are preci- 
sion tools in the hands of furthering monopolies and 
cartels, it follows that they would have to be used 
not only for expanding the wealth of those who 
control them but also for expanding the size and 
reach of government, for total government is the 
ultimate monopoly and their final goal. 

This, in fact, has been the most conspicuous 
aspect of foundation grants since their inception. 
The overwhelming majority of foundation- 
supported projects in the social or political sciences 
has resulted in promoting the concept of enlarging 
the scope of government, supposedly as the solu- 
tion to all of the problems and injustices of the 
nation and the world. Plush grants have gone to 
Scholars, researchers, schools, dramatists, 
churches, theater groups, mass-action organiza- 
tions, poets, and ivory tower think-tanks. They 
have been given to those who defend the Estab- 
lishment, to those who are anti-Establishment, to 
those who claim to be in the middle, and to those 
who plot violent revolutions to overthrow all exist- 
ing power structures. They have been bestowed 
upon Republicans, Democrats, ADAers, SDSers, 
socialists, and Communists. The apparent di- 
vergence of these groups leads the casual observer 
to the erroneous conclusion that the foundations 
are not selective or that they are promoting a kind of 
melting-pot democracy of ideas. But, upon closer 
examination, the one thing that all of these reci- 
pients^share in common is that they promote the 
growth of government; and that, in fact, is why they 
have been smiled upon by the forces of monopoly. 


There are a thousand examples that could be 
cited in support of this proposition, but let us limit 
ourselves only to the field of medicine which is the 
area of our present interest. Recent studies of 
socialized medicine in England and Sweden have 
turned up an extremely interesting fact. Because 
prescription drugs in these countries are "free" 
(paid out of taxes), the per capita use of these medi- 
cations is considerably higher than in the United 
States. Actually, the statistics show that where an 
individual has no financial interest in his medical bill 
he tends to overuse it just to make sure that he is 
getting all the benefits to which he thinks he is 
entitled. Doctors, also, tend to write out expensive 
prescriptions in marginal cases of probable need 
just to "process" the patient through his office 
more quickly. The result is that, under socialized 
medicine, the drug manufacturers are rewarded 
with an automatic and maximum market saturation 
for their products. We can be certain that the phar- 
maceutical Cartel that controls the medically- 
oriented foundations has not overlooked this fact, 
and we can be equally certain that the consistent 
history of foundation pressure for socialized 
medicine in the United States is no accident. 

The Milbank Fund was created by Albert G. 
Milbank, Chairman of the Borden Company, and 
also the leading partner in the Wall Street law firm 
of Milbank, Tweed, Hope, Hadley and McCloy. 
Milbank was no stranger to the cartel. In fact, John 
J. McCloy, one of his partners, was Chairman of 
the Chase National Bank, trustee of the Rockefel- 


ler Foundation, chairman of the board of the Coun- 
cil on Foreign Relations, and a member of the Ex- 
ecutive Committee of Squibb Pharmaceutical. The 
significance of the Milbank Fund is not that it has 
been the kindly sponsor of projects supposedly to 
upgrade the quality of public health, but that it was 
one of the first foundations to use its resources 
openly to promote government expansion via 
socialized medicine. 

Richard Carter, in his devastating attack 
against the AM A, entitled The Doctor Business, 
recounts the story: 

During the Coolidge and Hoover ad- 
ministrations;, organized medicine en- 
countered little legislative difficulty. Its 
^ worst problems were those posed by the 
Committee on the Costs of Medical Care 
and the philanthropic foundations which 
financed the jCCMC's work. The Mil- 
bank Fund was regarded as particularly 
virulent. Despite protests from local 
medical societies, it continued pilot 
studies in New York State which illus- 
trated the advantages of publicly or- 
ganized preventive medicine. Worse, its 
secretary, John A. Kingsbury, was an 
advocate of federal health insurance and 
so was its president, Albert G. Milbank. 
With the election of Franklin D. 
Roosevelt, such advocacy became for- 
midable. It was expected that Roosevelt 


would include compulsory health insur- 
ance in his Social Security laws. 1 

The entry of the Rockefeller group into the 
foundation arena is of paramount importance to-fhe 
subject of this treatise, for no other single force has 
t>een even remotely as influential in shaping the 
contours of modem medicine in America. One of 
the first moves in that direction was made when 
John D. Rockefeller retained the professional serv- 
ices of a high-powered public relations expert by 
the name of Ivy Lee. When Lee was called before 
the Congressional Committee to Investigate 
Foreign Propaganda and Other Subversive Ac : 
tivities (this later became known as the Dies Com- 
mittee, but in 1934 its chairmari was the Honorable 
John W. McCormack of Massachusetts), he 
testified reluctantly that he had been retained by 
I.G. Farben to give professional advice to most of 
the top Nazi leaders, including Goebbels, the 
Minister of Propaganda, and Hitler himself. 

Lee became famous in later years for accom- 
plishing what seemed to be an impossible task — 
improving the popular image of John D. Rockefel- 
ler. He had advised the old tycoon to give away a 
small percentage of his great wealth each year in the 
form of gifts to hospitals, libraries, schools, 
churches, and other charities, but to do so in the 
most conspicuous manner possible, usually with a 
large building to bear his name as a continuing tes- 
timony to his generosity and benevolence. 

barter, The Doctor Business* (Doubleday A Co., N.Y., 1958), pp. 
203, 204. 


To insure favorable pres s coverage , he advised 
Rockefeller to carry several rolls of shiny dimes 
with him at all public appearances so he could hand 
them out to any youngsters that might be present. It 
was largely through following this kind of advice 
that John D. Rockefeller gradually lost the old and 
thoroughly earned reputation for cunning and ruth- 
Jessness and became increasingly portrayed as a 
kind old philanthropist who loved children. 

The public relations value of philanthropy, of 
course, was not original with Ivy Lee. Rockefeller 
himself had observed how the negative image of 
George Peabody had been converted almost over- 
night by conspicuous acts of public charity, and the 
same with his close friend Andrew Carnegie. In 
fact, shortly after Carnegie proclaimed his famous 
"Gospel of Wealth" in which he stated that men of 
great fortune had an obligation to further' 
humanitarian objectives through philanthropy, 
Rockefeller wrote to him and^said: "Be assured, 
your example will bear fruits." 1 Later, when the 
first Rockefeller general philanthropic board was 
created, Carnegie was made a trustee and served 
for eteven years. Rockefeller and Carnegie, apply- 
ing the typical philosophy of industrial cartels, 
agreed not to compete or overlap in their philan- 
thropic endeavors, and operated their Respective 
foundations as though they were one; a fact which, 
through the years, has given each. of them an 
economic leverage even greater than would be indi- , 
cated by their separate vast resources. 

^aEren Weaver, U,S. Philanthropic Foundations; Their History, 
Structure* Management, and Record, (Harper & Row, N. Y., 1967), p. 

362 WORLD WITfm UT CANCER; Part Two 

The one man who prpbahly deserves more 
credit than any other for advancing the profitable 
science of foundation philanthropy was a "moder- 
nist" minister by the name of Fred Gates. First of 
all* it should be noted that Gates was far more of a 
businessman than he \#as a man of God. In fact he 
openly acknowledged that he always had held an 
aversion to fundamentalist religion, and that he en- 
tered the ministry in order to promote the * 'social" 
principles which, in his view, were implied in 
Christ's teachings. He explained: "I wanted to side 
with Him and His friends against the world and His 
enemies. That, frankly, was the only 'conversion' 1 
ever had." 1 

Fred Gates had attracted the attention of John 
D. Rockefeller as a result of his advice and efficient 
service to the flour magnate George A. Pillsbury. 
Gates had sh#wn Pillsbury how to dispose of a 
portion of his estate in such a manner thgst, not only 
did he receive maximum public approval, but he 
also was able to capture control of extremely lar&e 
sums 6f moriey froni other sources as well. 

This was the Gates formula; Pillsbury gave the 
Owatonpa Baptist Academy $50,000 on condition 
that the Baptist commumi^y at Imge would raise an 
eqimlamoiint. Gates then took on the job of raising 
the additionjai funds. The end result was that 
$ 100,000 was raised in all, and it was done in such a 
way tfcat the entire business community , through its 
, own financial share in the venture,, was led to iden- 
tify with the "noble" project of Mr. Pillsbury. 

, NeVins,/d/i/i D. Rockefeller, (Scribner & Sons, N.Y.,1959), v. 2, p. 


public credit and private influence over how the 
funds were used as he would have if he had financed 
the entire venture. That was getting double mileage 
out of one's philanthropy! 

John D, was quick to appreciate the usefulness 
of such a man as Fred Gates, the creator of this 
concept, and soon made him a key figure in his 
business enterprises. Rockefeller, himself, later 
described Gates in these glowing terms : 

Fred Gates was a wonderful business 
man. His work for the American Baptist 
Education Society required hirti to travel 
extensively. Once* as he was going south , 
I asked him to look into an iron mill in 
which I had ah interest. His report was a 
model of clarity! 

Then I asked him to make some investig- 
ation of other property in the west. I had 
been told this particular company was rol- 
ling in wealth. Mr. Gates' report showed 
that I had been deceived. 

Now I realized that 1 had met a commer- 
cial genius. I persuaded Mr. Gates to be- 
come a man of business. 1 

One of the first foundations established by 
Rockefeller and Gates was the General Education 
Board. The philosophical objective of this "philan- 

Uohn K. Winkler, John D. -A Portait in Oil (Vanguard Press, N.Y., 

364 WORLD WjTHQ UT CdtfCERi Part Two 

thropy" was not to raise the general level of educa- 
tion, as many people thought at the time, but to 
convert the American people into a docile and man- 
ageable herd of content and uncomplaining workers 
for the cartel. In the very first publication of the 
General Education Board, Gates wrote; 

In our dreams Vee have limitless re- 
sources, and the people yield themselves 
with perfect docility to our molding 
hands. Zhe present educational convene 
tions fade from our minds, and unham- 
pered by tradition, we work our own good 
will upon a gratefel and responsive rural 
folk. We shall mt try to make these peo- 
ple or any &f their children into 
philosophers of mental learning or of sci- 
ence . We have not to raise up from among 
them authors, editors, poets* or men of 
letters. We shall not search for embryo 
great artists, painters, musicians, nor 
lawyers , doctors , preachers , politicians, 
— statesmen of whom we have ample sup- 
ply * The task we set before ourselves is 
. very simple as well as a very beautiful 
one : To train these people as we find them 
taa perfectly ideal life just where they 
are. So we will organize our children into 
, a community and teach them to do in a 
perfect way the things their fathers and 
mothers are doing in an imperfect way, in 
the homes , in the shop, and on the farm, * 

^Occasional Paper No, 1,'* GeneKd Education Board, 1904. 


All of the biographies of John D. Rockefeller 
are in unanimous agreement over the fact that 
throughout his entire career, he harbored a virtual 
passion for efficiency, not only in business, but in 
the administration of his philanthropic funds as 
well. In the mind of this man, the word * 'efficiency'' 
undoubtedly meant far more than merely the ab- 
sence of waste. It meant expending the money in 
such a way as to bring about the maximum return to 
the donon. 

The Gates "matching funds" formula de- 
veloped for Pillsbury was refined even further for 
Rockefeller, and soon evolved into a set pattern in 
which John D. often controlled a large philan- 
thropic venture with as little as one-fourth of the 
total capitalization. Scores of professional fund- 
raisers could be counted upon to raise the balance 
from the gullible public at large. But since the 
largest single contribution came from Rockefeller, 
he received the major public credit and was able to 
secure control of the entire fund into the hands* of 
trustees and administrators who were entirely sub- 
servient to his will. This was the pattern that pro- 
duced such profitable ventures as the Charity Or- 
ganization Society, the State Charities Aid, the 
Greater New York Fund; and many others. 

The New York Tuberculosis and Health As- 
sociation was a classiqal example. Originally estab- 
lished b^a group of conscientious physicians dedi- 
cated to a crusade against T.B., it soon fell captive 
to the financial domination of Rockefeller money. 
Rockefeller put in charge of the program a rela- 
tively unknown social worker by the name of Harry 


Hopkins.* Under Hopkin's direction* the T.B. As- 
sociation grew to international proportions and, by 
192Q, was collecting many i^ions of dollars each 

Rockefeller eonft®iled the entire operation, of 
course but most pf the money came from the public 
through contributions and the purchase of Christ- 
mas Seals. One of the great scandals of 1932 cen- 
tered around the accusation made by New York 
City Health Commissioner Lewis I. Harris, in a 
letter to theJNfew York Times of June 8, and by the 
sul^equent admission bf the fund's officers, "that 
aU its money had been expended on salaries and 
overhead," " "~" 

The philanthropy formula worked so well that 
it was decided to expand into other fields also. A 
whole spectrum of similar agencies was established 
to exploit the public's dread of other diseases as 
weiL Within ajfew x years there sprang into being 
such organizations as The Heart Association, The v 
Social Hygiene Assoda^n^The Diabetes Associ- 
ation, The National Association for the Prevention 
of Blindness, The American Cancer Association, 
and many others. 

The American Cancer Society, incidentally, 
was formed officially in May pf 191 3-at the Harvard 
Club in New York. In later years its basiQ wfenta- 
tion has been determined by sSich names appearing 

^opidns, Hke so many Rockefeller proteges, moved into government 
work. Eventually he became WEA director, U.iSL Secretary of Com- 
merce, Lend-Lease Admimstratori and close friend, confidant, and 
advisor to FDR. He even took up pergonal residency in the White 
House where he lived for three-and-a-half years. Later it was learned 
that he had been a secret member of the Communist Party. 


on its board of directors as Alfred P. Sloan (General 
Motors), Charles D. Hilles (AT&T), Monroe 
Rathbone (Standard Oil), and Frederieh Eeker 
(Metropolitan Life). The American Cancer Society 
holds half ownership in the patent rights toj5FU 
(5 floufourapil), one of the most currently popular 
toxic drugs now being used as "acceptable" medi- 
cal treatment for cancer. 1 The drug is manufactured 
by the Hoffman-LaRoche Laboratories which is 
firmly within the IG — Rockefeller cartel orbit. 
Many donors to the ACS would be outraged to 
learn that this organization has a vested interest in 
the sale of drugs and a financial tie-in with the drug 

Rockefeller's first entry into philanthropy oh a 
grand scale/was in 1 89QLwhen, following the formula 
established by Gates, he pledged $600,000 to the 
Baptist University of Chicago on condition that the 
meat packers and dry £Oods merchants of the city 
also contribute a minimunvof $400,000. 

Biographer John T. Flynn graphically de- 
scribes the reaction: 

When the news of Rockefeller's princely 
gift was made known, the National Bap- 
tist Education Society Convention was 
being held in Boston. The announcement 
of the gift was received with cheers .... 
_ When the gift was named and the actual 
sum of money pronounced, ihe audience 
rose and sang the Doxology. Men burst 

*See Jones, Nutrition Rudiments in Cancer, op. tit., p. 17. 


out into exclamations of praise and joy. 
"The man who has given; this money is a 
godly man:,* 1 chanted one leader, 
Another rose and exclaimed: "The com- 
ing to the front of such a princely giver! A 
man to leadi It is the Lord's doing. God 
has kept Chicago for us . I wonder at his 
patience/ * 

On the following Sabbath throughout the 
country, sermons of thanksgiving were 
preached in almost ajl Baptist pulpits. 
"When a crisis came," entoned one 
minister, "God had a man to meet it." 
"God," cried out another, "has guided 
us and provided a teader 4114 a giver and 
so brought tis out Into a: large place." In 
scores of pulpits the phrase: "Man of 
God !" was tittered. A writer to the Inde- 
pendent said: "No benefaction has ever 
flowed from a purer Christian source ." * 

'Fiynn, God's Goldi op. cit. t pp. 305, 306. 





". "- The low state of medical 

education in the U.S. prior to 

x. 1910; the importance of the 

Flexner Report in dramatizing the 

need for reform; the role played 

by the Rockefeller and Carnegie 

: foundations in implementing the 

Flexner Report; and the use of 

foundation funding as a means of 

gaining control over American 

, medical schools. 

There is an old saying: "He who pays the 
piper, calls the tune/" This is one of those eternal 
truths that exist — and always will exist — in busi- 
ness, in politics, and in education. 

We, have seen how John D. Rockefeller cap- 
tured the hearts of Baptjst ministers with a mere 
$600,000 granted to Chicago University. 
What remains to be demonstrated is that lie also 
captured control of the university. 

Within a year after the grant, Rockefeller's 
personal choice, Dr, William Rainey Harper, was 


370 WORLD Wl THO UT CA NCER: Part Two^ 

named president of -the institution, And within two 
years, the teaching staff had been successfully 
purged of all ant^Rockefeller dissidents. A profes- 
sor of economics and a professor of literature dis- 
tinguished themfejves by proclaiming that Mr. 
Rockefeller :was "superior in creative genius to 
Shakespeare, Homer, and Dante. ?M 

By comparison, another teacher, a Professor 
Bemis, was expelled from the staftfor "incompe- 
tence" when he repeatedly criticized the action of 
the railroads during the Pullman strike of 1894. A 
few years later, after the Rockefeller family, 
through the "philanthropy' ' of John Archbald, had 
gained parallel influence at Syracuse University in 
western New York, an economics instructor by the 
name of John Cummons was dismissed by the 
Chancellor for similar reasons. 

In 1953, Representative B. Carroll Reese of 
Tennessee received the authority of Congress to 
establish a special committee to investigate the 
power and influence of tax-exempt foundations. 
The committee nlver got very far off the ground 
due to mounting. political pressure from multiple 
sources high within government itself and, eventu- 
ally, Reese was forced to terminate the committee's 
work. During its $hort period of existence, how- 
ever, many interesting and highly reveafe^ facts 
were brought to light. Norman Doddi who was the 
committee's director of research, and probably one 
of the country- s most knowledgeable authorities oh 

tJosephson, The Rabbet Barents, op. cit. t p. 324. 


foundations, testified during the hearings afid told 
the committee: 

The result of the development and opera- 
tion of the network in which the founda- 
tions (by their support and encourage- 
ment) have played such a significant role, 
seems to have provided this country with 
what is tantamount to a national system 
, of education under the tight control of 
.organizations and persons little known to 
the American public. .., . The cur- 
^ riculum in this tightly controlled schenie 
of education is designed to indoctrinate 
the American student from matriculation 
to the consummation of his education. 1 

Under the careful supervision of Fred Gates, 
John D. Rockefeller set r out consciously and 
niethodipally to capture control of American educa- 
tion and particularly of American n^edical 
education. The process began in 1901 with the crea- 
tion of the Rockefeller Institute for Medidal Re- 
search. It included on its board such politically 
oriented " medical' ' names as Doctors L. Emmett 
Holt, Christian A. Herter, T. MitcheU Pruden, 
Hermann ML Briggs, William H. Welch v Thjeobald 
Srmth, and Simon Flexner. Christian Herter was . 
slated for bigger things, of course, and became Sec- 
retary of State under President Eisenhower. Simon 
Flexner also was destined for larger success. Al- 

J As quoted by Weaver, U.S. Philnnthapic Foundations, dpi eft., pp. 
175, 176, 

372 ' .- WORLD WITBOUT CANCER*- Part Two 

though his name never became as well-known as 
that of Herter, he and his brother, Abraham Flex- 
ner, probably influenced the lives of more people 
and in a more profound way than has any Secretary 
of State. 

Abraham Flexner was on the staff of the Car^ 
jiegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teach- 
ing. As mentioned pre viously, the Rockefeller and 
Cafnegje foundations traditionally worked together 
almost as one in the. furtherance of their mutual 
goals, and this certainly was no exception. The 
Flexner brothers represented the lens that brought 
both the Rockefeller and the Carnegie fortunes into 
sharp focus on the unsuspecting and thoroughly 
vulnerable medical profession. 

Prior to 1910, the practice of medicine in the 
United States left a great4eal to be desired. Some 
medical decrees could be purchased through the 
mail arid many others could be obtained with mar- 
ginal training at understaffed and inadequate medi- 
cal schools. The profession was suffering from a 
bad public reputation arid reform was iri the air. 

The American Medical Association had begun 
-to take an interest in cleaning its own house. It 
created a Council on Medical Education^ for the 
express purpose of surveying the status of medical 
irainjng^throughout the country and of making 
specific recpmmendation& for its improvement. But . 
by 1908 it had run into serious difficulty as a result 
of committee differences and insufficient funding. 
It was into this void that the RockefieOef^Carnegie 
combine moved with brilliant strategy arid perfect 
timing. Henry S. Pritchett, the president of the 



Carnegie Foundation, approached the AMA and 
simply offered to take over the entire project. The 
minutes for the meeting of the AMA's Council on 
Medical Education held in New Yofck in December 
of 1908 tell the story: 

At one o'clock an informal conference 
was held with Presi^entPritcliett and Mr. 
Abraham Flexner of the Carnegie Foun- 
dation. Mr. Pritchett had already expres- 
sed by correspondence the willingness of 
the Foundation to cooperate with the 
Council in investigating the medical 
schools. He now explained that the 
Foundation was to investigate all the 
professions: law, medicine, and 
theology. 1 ... 

He agreed with the opinion previously 
expressed by ihe members of the CoOfttdl 
that while the Foundation would be 
guided very largely by the Council's In- 
vestigation-, to avoid the usual claims of 
.partiality no more me ntioti should be 
made in the report of the Council than any 
other source of information; The report 
would therefore be, and have the weight 
of, a disinterested body, which would 
then be published far and wide . It would 
do muchr to develop public opinion. 2 

, IMs is not the^ubject of the present study » but the reader should hot 
pass over the fact that exactly the same strategy for control over 
education was being executed in other key areas as well. 
2 Morris Fishbein, M.D.,4 History of the AMA, (W.B. SaundersCo., 
Philadelphia & London, 1947), pp. 987, 989.. | 


Here was the classical "philanthropic for- 
mula* ' at work again. Have others pay a friajor 
portion of the bill (the AMA had already done most 
of the work. The total Carnegie investment was 
only $10,000), reap a large bonus from public opin- 
ion (Isn't it wonderful that these men are taking an 
interest in upgrading, medMl education !), and gain 
an opportunity to eontipol a large and vital sphere of 
American life. 

This is how that control came about. 

The Flexner Report, as it was called, was pub- 
lished in 1910^ As anticipated, it was "published far 
and Wide," and it did "do much to develop public 
opinion.'' The report quite correctly pointed out 
the inadequacies of medical education at the time. 
No one could take exception with that. It also 
proposed a wide range of sweeping changes, most 
of which were entirely sound. No one could take 
exception >vith those, either. The alert researcher 
will note, however? the cecommendations emphati- 
cally included the strengthening of courses in 
pharmacology and the addition ^f research 
departments at all " qualified v ' medical schools. 

And so, the Flexner; Report was above re- 
proach and, undoubtedly, it performed a service 
that was much needed at the time. It is what fol- 
lowed in the wake of the report that reveals its true 
purpose in the total plan. Rockefeller and Carnegie 
began immediately to fftower hundreds of millions 
of dcjllars on those better medical schpols that were 
vulnerable to control. Thpse that did mot conform 
were denied the funds and the prestige that came 
With thoste funds, and were forced out of business* 


A hundred and sixty schools were in operation in 
1905. By 1927, the number had dropped to eighty. 
True, most of those that were edged out had been 
sub-standard. But so were some of those that re- 
ceived foundation money and survived. The pri- 
mary test was not their previous standing but their 
willingness to accept foundation influence and con- 

Historian Joseph Goulden describes the pro- 
cess this way: 

Flexner had the ideas, Rockefeller and 
Carnegie had the money, and their mar : 
riage Was spectacular. The Rockefeller 
Institute for Medical Research and the 
General Education Board showered 
money on tolerably respectable schools 
and on professors who expressed an in- 
terest in research. 1 

Since 1910, the foundations have "invested" 
over a billion dollars in the medical schools of 
America. Nearly half of the faculty members now 
receive a portion of their income from foundation 
"research" grants, ^nd over sixteen percent of 
them are entirely funded this way. Rockefeller and 
Carnegie have not been the only source of these 
funds. Substantial influence also has been exerted 
by the Ford Foundation, the Kellogg Foundation, 
the Commonwealth Fund (a Rockefeller interlock 
created by Edward Harkness of Standard Oil), the 
Sloan Foundation, and the Macy Foundation. The 

Goulden, The Money Givers, op. cit., p. 141. 


Foi;d Foundation has b£en extremely active in the 
field of medical education in recent years, but none 
of them can compare to the Rockefellers and the 
Carnegies for sheer money volume and historical 

Joseph C. Hinsey, in his highly authoritative 
paper entitled "The Role of Private Foundations in 
the Development of Modern Medicine," reviews 
the sequence of this expanding influence: 

Starting with Johns Hopkins Medical 
School in 1913, the General Education 
Board supported reorganizations which > 
bropght about full-time instruction in the 
clinical as well as the basic science de- 
partments of the first two years of medical 
education at Washington University in 
St. Louis, at Yale, and at Chicago. In . 
1923 , a grant was made to the University 
of Iowa in the amount of $2,250,000 by 
the General Education Board and the 
Rockefeller Foundation! Similar grants 
in smaller amounts were made tothe fol- 
lowing state-supported medical schools: 
University of Colorado, University of 
* Oregon, University "of Virginia, and 
University of Georgia. An appropriation 
was made to the University of Cincin- 
nati, an institution which received some 
of its support from municipal sources. 
Howard University and the Meharry 
Medical School -were strengthened, the 
latter by some eight million dollars. The 
General Education Board and the Rock- 


efeller Foundation later made substantial 
grants to the medical schools at Harvard, 
Vanderbilt, Columbia, Cornell, Tulane, 
Western Reserve, Rochester, D_uke, 
Emory, and the Memorial Hospital in 
New York affiliated with Cornell. 1 

This list, of course is not complete. It is neces- 
sary to add to it the* medical schools of Northwest- 
ern, Kansas, and Rochester; each heavily en- 
dowed, either by Rockefeller money, or by the 
Commonwealth Fund which is closely aligned with 
Rockefeller interests. 2 v 

After Abraham Flexner completed his report, 
he became one of the three most influential men in 
American medicine.. The other two were his 
brother, Dr. Simon Flexner of the Rockefeller In- 
stityte and Dr. William Welch of Johns Hopkins 
Medical School and of the Rockefeller Institute. 
According to Hinsey, these men, acting as "a 

... were not only involved in the award- 
ing of grants for the Rockefeller Founda- 
tion, but fhfey were counselors to heads of 
, institutions, to lay board members, to -" 
members of staffs of medical schools and 
universities in the United States and 
abroad. They served as sounding boards, 
as stimulators of ideas and programs, 
as mediators irl situations of difficulty. 3 

'Article reprinted in Warren Weaver's U ,S . ' Philanthropic Founda- 
tions, op. cit., pp. 264, 265. 
2 lb'id., p. 268. 
3 Ibid., p. .274. 


The Association of American Medical Col- 
leges has been one of the principal vehicles of foun- 
dation and cartel control over medical education in 
the United States and Canada. First organized in 
1 876, it serves the function of setting a wide range of 
standards for all medical schools. It determines the 
criteria for selecting medical students, for cur- 
riculum development, for programs of continuing 
medical education after graduation, and for com- 
munication within the profession as well as to the 
general public. The Association of American Med- 
ical Colleges, from its inception, has been funded 
and dominated by the' Commonwealth Fund, the 
Chirfa Medical Board (created in 1914 as a division 
of the Rockefeller Foundation), the Kellogg Foun- 
dation, the Macy, Markle, Rockefeller, and Sloan 
foundations. 1 

By way of analogy, we may say that the foun- 
dations captured control of the apex of the pyramid 
of medical education when they were able to place 
their own people onto the boards of the various 
schools and into key administrative positions. The 
middle of the pyramid was secured by the Associa- 
tion of American Medical Colleges which set stan- 
dards and unified the curricula. The base of the 
pyramid, however, was not consolidated until they 
finally were able to select the teachers themselves. 
Consequently, a major portion of foundation activ- 
ity always has been directed toward what generally 
is called "academic medicine." Since 1913, the 
foundations have completely pre-empted this field. 
The Commonwealth Fund reports a half a million 

'Ibid., pp. 267, 268. 


dollars in one year alone appropriated for this pur- 
pose, while the Rockefeller Foundation boasts of 
over twenty thousand fellowships and scholarships 
for the training of medical instructors. 1 

. In The Money Givers, Joseph Goulden 
touches upon this sensitive nerve when he says: 

If the foundations chose to speak, their 
voice would resound with the solid clang 
of the cash register. Their expenditures 
on health and hospitals totalled more than 
a half-billion dollars between 1964 and 
1968, according to a compilation by the 
American Association of Fund-Raising 
Counsel. But the foundations' "innova- 
tive money ' ' goes for research, not for the 
production of doctors who treat human 
beings. Medical schools, realizing this-, 
paint their faces with the hu^ desired by 
their customers. 2 

Echoing this same refrain, David Hopgood, 
writing in the Washington Monthly, says: 

The medical school curriculum and its 
entrance requirements are geared to the 
highly academic student who is headed 
for research. In the increasingly desper- 
ate struggle for admission, these academ- 
ically talented students are crowding out 
those who want to practice medicine. 3 

'Ibid., pp. 265, 266. 

2 Goulden, The Money Givers, op. cit., p. 144. 

3 "Tfie Health Professional^: Cure or Cause of the Health Crises?" 

Washington Monthly^ June, 1969. v . ; 


And so it has come to pass that the teaching 
staffs of all our medical schools are a very special 
breed. In the selection and training process, heavy 
• emphasis always has been put on finding individuals 
who, because of temperament or special interest, 
have been attracted by the field of research, and 
especially by research in pharmacology. This has 
resulted in loading the; staffs of our medical schools 
with men and'women who, by preference and by 
training, are ideal propagators of the drug-oriented 
science that has come to dominate American 
medicine. And the irony of it is that neither they nor 
their students are even remotely aware that they are 
products of a rigid selecti^i process geared to hid- 
den commercial objectives. So thorough is their 
insulation from this fact that, even when exposed to 
the obvious truth, very few are capable of accepting 
it, for to do so' would be a tremendous blow to their 
professional pride. Generally speaking, the deeper 
one is di^awn into the medical profession, the e more 
years he has been exposed to its regimens, the more 
difficult it is to break out of its confines. In practical 
terms, this simply means that your doctor probably 
will be the last person on your Christmas card list to 
accept the facts presented in this study! 

Dr. David L. Bdsall at one time was the Dean 
of the Harvard Medical School. The conditions he 
describes at Harvard are the same as those at every 
other medical school in America: 

I was, for a period, a professor of 
therapeutics and pharmacology, and I 
knew from experience that students were 


obliged then by me and by others to learn 
about an interminable number of drugs, 
many of which were valueless, many of 
them useless, some probably even 
harmful .... Almost all subjects must 
be taken at exactly the same time, and in 
almost exactly in the same way by all 
students, and the amount introduced into 
each course is such that ,few students 
have time or energy to explore any Sub- 
ject in a spirit of independent interest. A 
little comparison shows that there is less 
intellectual freedom in the medical course 
than in almost any other form of profes- 
sional education in this country. 1 

Yes-, he who pays the piper does call the tune. 
It may not be humanly possible for those who fi- 
nance the medical schools to determine what is 
taught in every minute detail. But such is not neces- 
sary to achieve the cartel's desired goals. One can 
be sure^ however, that there is total control over 
what is not taught, and that, under no circum- 
stances will even one of Rockefeller's shiny dimes 
ever go to a medical college, to a hospital^ to a 
teaching staff, or to a researcher that holds the 
unorthodox view that the best medicine is in nature. 
Because of its generous patron, orthodoxy always 
will fiddle a tune of man-made drugs. Whatever 
basic nutrition may be allowed into the melody will 
be minimal at best, and it will be played over and 

*As quoted by Morris A. Bealle, The New Drug Story, (Columbia 
Publishing Co., Wash. D.C., 1958), pp. 19, 20. 


over again that natural sources of vitamins are in ho 
way superior to those that are man-made or syn- 
thesized. The day when orthodox medicine finally 
embraces the field of nutrition will be the day when 
the cartel behind it also has monopolized the vita- 
min and food product industry essential to it — not 
one day before. 

In the meantime, while doctors are forced to 
spend hundreds of hoprs studying the names and 
actions of all kinds of man-made drugs, they are 
lucky if they receive even ar portion of a single 
course on basic nutrition. Many have none at all. 
The result is that the average doctor's wife or sec- 
retary knows more about practical nutrition than he 

Returning to the main theme, however, we find 
that the cartel's influence over the field of orthodox 
medicine is felt far beyond the medical schools. 
After the doctor has struggled his way through ten 
or twelve years of learning what the cartels have 
decided is best for him to learn, he then goes out 
into the world of medical practice and immediately 
is embraced by the other arm of cartel control — ' 
The American Medical Association. 

So let us turn, now, to that part of this continu- 
ing story. 


■ * ilHftll 
J Ill Hit 

l«iii« liim 

iH1 »»ii»«»""| 

™ % ills g mi 
— mi 
|« imi„ 

II t MtlMt MB ,. > 

National Archives 

(above) I.G. Farben, the world's largest 
chemical and drug cartel, was 
headquartered in this building in Frankfort, 
Germany. It became the backbone of the 
Nazi war machine. Yet, during the massive 
bombing raids on Frankfort, American 
bombardiers were instructed to spare this 
building. It survived without a scratch. 

(below) During the Nuremberg trials it was 
learned that the business leaders of I.G. 
Farben actually had controlled the Nazi 
state. Oswald Pohl, an SS Lieutenant 
General who was sentenced to hang, is 
shown here explaining how Farben operated 
such concentration camps as Auschwitz and 

U.S. Army 


U.S Army Photos 


Adolph Hitler (above) at a 1932 meeting in 
Berlin. Hitler's rise to power would have 
been impossible without the secret financial 
support of I.G. Farben. The Nazi state 
became the means by which cartel 
agreements were enforced. 

At left are key Farben defendents at the 
Nuremberg War Crimes trials. Hermann 
Schmitz, the mastermind of the cartel, was 
an integral part of the international banking 
structure. Carl Krauch was chairman of 
Farben's board of directors. Max llgner, 
Farben's "Director of Finance," in reality was 
in charge of espionage and propaganda. 
Otto Ambros (bottom right) was production 
chief of Farben's poison gas facilities. 

John D. Rockefeller, Sr. (above), often gave 
away shiny dimes to small children in an 
attempt to improve his public image. This 
device was suggested by Ivy Lee (left) one of 
the world's foremost public relations experts. 
Mr. Lee also had been retained by I.G. 
Farben to appraise the public image 
potential of Adolph Hitler. 

Walter Teagle (above, left), while president 
of Standard Oil, secretly held stock in Farben 
enterprises on behalf of the Rockefeller 
family. Through such ploys the Rockefellers 
have attempted to conceal their financial 
interest in the field of drugs. 


Pictoral Parade 

Abraham Flexner (above), author of the 
famous Flexner Report of 1910, led the 
crusade for upgrading the medical schools of 
America. All the while he was in the employ 
of Andrew Carnegie (above, left) and John D. 
Rockefeller (left) who had set up gigantic 
tax-exempt foundations for that purpose. The 
end result was that all medical schools 
became heavily oriented toward drugs and 
drug research, for it was through the 
increased sale of these drugs that the 
donors realized a profit on their donations. 

John D. Rockefeller, Sr., shown here at 

age 93, had created fantastic wealth. 

When he interlocked his own empire 

with that of I.G. Farben in 1928, there 

was created the largest and most 

powerful cartel the world has ever 

known. Not only has that cartel survived 

through the years, it has grown and 

prospered. Today it plays a major role 

in both the science and politics of 

cancer therapy. 





AMA influence over the practice 

of medicine in America; the 

means by which the leadership of 

the AM A keeps control away 

from the general membership; the 

extent to which the AM A is 

financed by the drug industry; 

and examples of interlock 

between the two. 

The American Medical Association climbed 
into bed' with the Rockefeller and Carnegie in- 
terests in 1908 for the praiseworthy purpose of up- 
grading American medicine '. Like the young lady 
who compromised her virtue "just this once" to 
pay for a needed operation for her ailing mother, the 
AM A has been sharing its sheets ever since. 

The impact of this organization on the average 
physician is probably greater than even he recog- 
nizes. First of all, the medical student cannot obtain 
an M.D. degree except at a school that has been 
accredited by the AMA. He must serve an intern- 
ship only at a hospital that meets AMA standards as 
a teaching institution. If he decides to become a 
specialist, his residency must conform to AMA 



requirements. His license to practice is issued in 
accordance with state laws worked out by AMA 
leaders. To prove his standing as an ethical prac- 
titioner he must apply to and be accepted by his 
county and state societies in conformity with AMA 
procedures. AMA publications provide him with 
continuing education in the form of scientific arti- 
cles, research findings, reviews and abstracts from 
medical books, question and answer discussions of 
clinical problems, evaluations of new drugs, foods, 
and appliances, authoritative essays, editorials, let- 
ters to the editor, and a hundred similar appeals to 
his intellectual understanding, of the profession he 
practices. "At the AMA's week-long convention 
each year, the physician is exposed to what is called 
"a complete post-graduate education under one 
roof." If he has the interest and the stamina, he can 
attend his choice of hundreds of lectures, exhibits, 
and demonstrations, watch closed-circuit color, 
videotapes, see the latest medical films, and carry 
home a suitcase full of pamphlets, books, and espe- 
cially free drug samples. ; 

As Richard Carter explained in his critical 
work entitled The Doctor Business: 

On the national level, the AMA extended 
its authority far beyond the medical 
schools. As custodian of medical stan- 
dards, it began determining the eligibility 
of hospitals to train new physicians. It 
gave authoritative advice on the training 
of nurses and technicians. It was influen- 


" tial in the passage of pure food and drug 
legislation, exposure of unscientific rem- 
edies, and stigmatization of cultism and 
quackery. 1 

The AMA spends millions of dollars per year 
for television programs to affe.ct public opinion, 
maintains one of the richest and most active lobbies 
in Washington, spends many millions in support of 
favored political candidates, is instrumental in the 
selection of the Commissioner of the Food and 
Drug Administration, and . . . well, let us just say 
that the AMA is a substantial force in American 

Who controls the AMA? Most people would 
assume that the dues-paying members control their 
own association, but nothing could be further fronv 
the truth. 

The AM A was founded in 1847 primarily 
through the efforts of three men: Dr. George Sim- 
mons, Dr. J. N. McCormack, and a Dr. Reed. 
Simmons ^as really the driving force behind the 
organizatipn in those early days, acting as general 
manager, but McCormack and Reed shared in a 
great deal of the association's work including legis : 
lative lobbying. Simmons is particularly interesting 
because he headed the AMA's drive against so- 
called diploma mills, yet, it is said that he had ob- 
tained his. own medical degree through the mail 
from the Rush Medical School. 

barter, The Doctor Business, (Doubleday & Co., N.Y., 1958) pp. 

78, 79. ' > ' 


One does not have to be a good physician, of 
course, to run a medical association. In fact, a man 
with a busy personal medical practice ^seldom be- 
comes involve.d with the leadership of the AMA 
simply because he doesn't have the time to spare, 
and, as often is the case, the temperament and 
dedication that are required for success in the prac- 
tice of medicine are not the same as required for 
success in running large membership organizations. 
For this reason; the AMA, from its very inception, 
has been dominated by untypical physicians: men 
who enjoy the limelight and the thrill of accom- 
plishment through medical politics. The typical 
physician, by comparison, is not only baffled by the 
intrigue and maneuvering for position behind the 
scenes, but wants no part of it for himself. He is 
more than content to leave the affairs of his associa- 
tion in the hands of those who enjoy the game. 

The deceptive appearance of democracy is 
preserved through the AMA House of Delegates, 
which, meets twice a year. Reference committees 
are formed for the purpose of making recommenda- 
tions on the various resolutions submitted by state 
delegates or-=by the National Board of Trustees. 
But, following the pattern of political parties, the 
leadership maintains firm control over these resolu- 
tions by having the members of the reference com- 
mittees appointed by the Speaker of the House not. 
by the delegates. The committees are firmly 
stacked to carry out the will of the leadership. 
Those occasional innocents who are appointed for 
protective coloration usually are bewildered and 


One delegate who found himself lost in the 
maze complained: 

It's difficult to make a sensible contribu- 
tion to the work. If you're on a reference 
committee, all those resolutions are 
tossed in your lap and you can't make 
head or tail of the situation because you 
don't have time. The committee has not 
/ met before, has had no opportunity for 
advance study of the major issues, and is 
disbanded right after the convention, so 
the whole thing is kind of ephemeral., 
Your problem is solved, though, because 
a member of the Board of Trustees is 
always present at the committee meeting 
to "clarify" the issues for you. In the old 
days it used to be even worse. Until a few 
years ago, none of the resolutions was 
presented in writing. You had to sit and 
iisten to every word, and there were times 
when you found yourself voting for the 
exact opposite of what you thought you 
were voting for. 1 

The president of the AMA is a mere 
figurehead. He has absolutely no administrative or 
executive duties; His-primary function is to deliver 
talks to various groups around the country explain- 
ing the program and goals of the Association. The 
position primarily is an honorary one, and it is not 
part of the AMA's permanent leadership. 

l Ibid., pp. 73, 74. 


If any members or delegates should become 
dissatisfied with their leadership, there is practi- 
cally no way for them to make a change. In order to 
do so would require a concerted campaign among 
the other delegates to support a whole new slate of 
exebutive officers. Bui even that remote possibility 
has been effectively blocked. There is a standing 
rule, adopted in 1902, that reads, 

The solicitation of votes for office is not 
in keeping with the dignity of the medical 
profession, nor in harmony with the spirit 
of this Association, and . . . shall be con- 
sidered a disqualification for election to 
any office in the gift of this Association. 

It is* through tactics like these that the AM A 
perpetuates dictatorial control over its members 
while wearing the mask of democratic response to 
the will of the majority. 

Of course, not all physicians are blind to these 
facts. The AM A dictatorship was pointed out as 
long ago as 1922 in the December issue of the Il- 
linois Medical Journal, the house organ of the Il- 
linois Medical Society. In a scathing article entitled 
"The AMA Becomes An Autocracy," the journal 
charged that the AMA was a dictatorship organiza- 
tion run by one man, that it had ignored the demo- 
cratic will of the membership, that it concerned itself 
with building a financial empire to benefit those 
who control it, and that it does not serve the doctors 
who support it with their dues and reputations. 


Since 1922 the state medical journals have be- 
come financially interlocked with the AM A Jour- 
nal, so there no longer is any possibility of publish- 
ing such harsh views. But the discontent continues. 
Doctors may not realize exactly who controls the 
AMA or why, but they increasingly are becoming 
aware that the organization does not represent 
them. By 1969, the AMA membership had stopped 
growing, and by 1970, it actually had declined. As 
of 197 1 , less than half of all physicians in the United 
States were paying dues. 

If AMA members or delegates do not control 
their organization v then who does? Who constitutes 
this "dictatorship" to which the Illinois Medical 
Journal has referred? 

The structure and operating procedures of the 
AMA were well conceived to put totaf control of 
that organization into the hands of the one man who 
occupies the chief full-time staff position. Although 
supposedly hired' by the AMA as its employee, 
actually he is beyond reach of the general member- 
ship because of his inside knowledge, his ability to 
devote unlimited tim^to the task, and his powerful 
influence in the selection of spembers of the self- 
perpetuating Board of Trustees. But he holds even 
a more powerful sword than that over the head of 
the organization because he also is the man who is 
responsible for bringing in the money. The AMA 
could not survive on membership dues alone, and 
without the income secured by him, the Associa- 
tion would undoubtedly flounder. 

The key to financial solvency for the organiza- 


tion has been its monthly publication, the AMA 
Journal. It was begun in 1883 by Dr. Simmons as a 
last ditch effort to save the infant association from 
bankruptcy. Its first press run was 3,500 copies and 
sold at a subscription rate of five dollars per year. 
But it was anticipated that the great bulk of the 
r-e venue would be derived from advertisers. By 
1973, under the tight control of Managing Editor 
Dr. Morris Fishbein, it had a print order of almost 
200,000 copies each month and had extended its 
publication list to include twelve separate journals 
including the layman's monthly, Today's Health. 1 
Altogether the AMA now derives over ten million 
dollars per year in advertising, which is almost half 
of the Association's total income. 

Who advertises in the AMA Journal and re- 
lated publications? The lion's share is derived from 
the Pharmaceutical Manufacturer's Association 
whose members, make up ninety-five percent of the 
American drug industry. 

Morris Fishbein had become a lot more to the 
AMA than his title of Managing Editor would sug- 
gest. He was its chief executive and business man- 
ager. He brought in the money and he determined 
how it was to be spent. His investments on behalf of 
the Association have been extremely profitable, so 
the grateful membership could not, or at least dared 
not, complain too bitterly. One of the reasons for 
this investment success was that over ten million 

'This magazine has been particularly vicious in its attack against vita- 
min B17 cancer therapy. See "The Pain Exploiters; The Victimizing of 
Desperate Cancer Patients/' Today's Health, Nov., 1973, p. 28. 


dollars of the organization's retirement fund has 
been put into leading drug companies. 1 

In later years, much ofthe executive control of 
the AMA has been wielded by Joe Miller, the As- 
sistant Executive Vice President. Formerly an 
administrator ofthe government health program for 
Kentucky and an influential associate of the Lyn- 
don Johnson-Bobby Baker group, Miller is viewed 
by many as a man who is totally devoid of any 
political ideology, merely playing his role for what- v 
ever personal gain or power he can derive. As such, 
he would be a perfect set-up for the pharmaceutical 
"cartel with its extensive financial support of AMA 
programs. Either way, there is little doubt that the 
success of the AMA, and those who direct it de- 
pends in more ways than one on the prosperity and 
good will of the pharmaceutical industry. 

Item: In 1972 the AMA's Council on Drugs 
completed an exhaustive study of most ofthe com- 
monly available compounds then in general use. 
The long awaited evaluation hit like an unexpected 
bomb. The Council reported that some ofthe most 
profitable drugs on pharmacy shelves were "irra- 
tional" and that they could not be recommended. 
And to add ihsult tp injury, the chairman and vice- 
chairman of the Council stated before a Senate 
subcommittee that the large income derived from 
the various drug manufacturers had made the AMA 
"a captive arm atid beholden to the pharmaceutical 
industry." The AMA responded by abolishing its 

14 'AMA Says It Owns $10 Million in Drug Shares," (UPI), News 
Chronicle. (Calif.),. June 27, 1973, p. 4. 


Council on Drugs. The reason given was "an 
economy move." 1 

Item: AMA spokesman, Dr. David B. All- 
man, clarified one of the prime directives of his 
organization when he said: 

Both the medical profession and phar- 
macy must shoulder one major public re- 
lations objective: to tell the American 
people over and over that nearly all of 
today's drugs, especially the antibiotics, 
are bargains at any price. 2 

Item: While placating its member physicians 
with press releases and much public gesturing 
against^government intervention in the fifeld of 
medicine, the AMA has been one of the most effec- 
tive forces behind the scenes to bring about just the 
opposite. Under the beguiling excuse of "Let us 
defeat total socialized medicine by promoting par- 
tial socialized medicine," it has provided the model 
legislation for the nation's largest single step toward 
total government control ever taken in this area. 

The legislation is known as Public Law 92-603, 
passed by Congress and signed by President Nixon 
on October 30, 1972. It is more commonly referred 
to as PSRP, which stands for Professional Stan- 
dards Review Organization. PSRO authorizes the 
Department of Health, Education and Welfare to 
create both a national and a series of regional 

14 'Crossing the Editor's Desk," National Health Federation Bulletin, 
Oct., 1973, p. 30. 

2 Catter, The Doctor Business, op. cit., p. 141. 


boards for the purpose of "reviewing" the profes- 
sional activities of all doctors in the United States. 
The men on these boards are to be doctors also, but 
"they will be selected or approved by the govern- 
ment; they must follow standards set down by gov- 
ernment agencies. These government boards are 
authorized to compel all doctors to standardize 
their procedures, treatments and prescriptions, to 
conform with those federal standards. All previ- 
ously confidential patient records are to be availa- 
ble to the government boards for inspection. Doc- 
tors who do not comply can be suspended from 
practice or fined up to $5,000. 

At the time of its passage, PSRO applied only 
to those doctors and patients who were participate 
ing in the hospital medical care provision of the 
Social Security Act, but it was clearly understood 
that if these* provisions were extended to more of 
the population — as they generally have been each 
year — PSRO automatically would follow. 

And this entire scheme was drafted by the 
AMA Legal Department, submitted to Congress as 
part of its "Medicredit" bill, and never even ap- 
proved by the AMA House of Delegates or its 

There are many more equally revealing items, 
of course, but time and space call us back to our 
point of departure. Iris undeniable that the founda- 
tions and the financial-industrial forces behind 
them have performed a great service in helping to 
elevate the American medical profession above the 
relatively low level of prestige and technical compe- 



tence it endured in 1910 v It is probable, however, 
that the profession, in time, would have done so by 
itself, and it is certain that it would have been far 
better off if it had. The price it has paid for listening 
to the siren call of money has been too high. It has 
allowed itself to be~lured onto the reef of a new 
medieval dogmatism in medicine — a dogmatism 
that forces all practitioners into a compliance with 
holy pronouncements of- scientific truth — a dog- 
matism that has closed the door on the greatest 
scientific advance of the Twentieth Century. 





Cartel agents in the federal 

government; the CFR examined 

as a parallel structure for cartel 

control over U.S. foreign policy; 

cartel influence within the FDA; 

examples of FDA scientific 

ineptitude; and the growth of 

FDA \sMdministrative power. 

In 1970, Dr. Herbert Ley made a statement 
that, coming from a lesser source, easily could be 
dismissed as the rantings of an uninformed malcon- 
tent. Considering that Dr. Ley is a former Commis- 
sioner of the Food and Drug Administration, how- 
ever, his words cannot be brushed aside so lightly. 
He said: 

The thing that bugs me is that the people - 
think the FDA is protecting them. It 
isn't. What the FDA is doing and what 
the public thinks it's doing are as different 
as night and day. 1 

x San Francisco Chronicle, Jan. 2, 1970, as quoted in Autopsy On The 
A.M. A., (Student Research Facility, Berkeley, 1970), p. 42. 



What is the FDA doing? As will be shown by 
the material that follows, the FDA is "doing" three 

First, it is providing a means whereby key 
individuals on its payroll are able to ob- . 
tain both power and wealth through grant- 
ing special favors to certain politically 
influential groups that are subject to its 
regulations. This activity is similar to the 
"protection racket" of organized crime: 
for a price, oqe can induce FDA adminis- 
trators to provide "protection" from the 
FDA itself. 

Secondly, as a result of this political 
favoritism, the FDA has become a pri- 
mary factor in that formula whereby car- 
tel-oriented companies in the food and 
drug industry are able to use the police 
powers of government to harass or de- 
stroy their free-market competitors. 

And thirdly, the FDA occasionally does 
some genuine public good with whatever 
energies it has Jeft over after serving the 
vested political and commercial interest 
of its first two activities. 

A brief backward glance at the total landscape 
will help us to appreciate more fully the present 
extent of cartel influence, not only in the FDA, but 
at all levels of the federal government, for it is an 


historical fact that, the centers of political power 
long have been the easy target of cartel penetration 
and control. - ' 

Previously we have outlined the degree to 
which it succeeded in placing its friends and agents 
into such areas of government as the office of the 
Alien Property Custodian, the Attorney- 
General's office, the State Department *and the 
White House itself. In addition to the list of 
names formerly; mentioned, however, there also 
must be included such government dignitaries as 
Secretary of State Dean Rusk (head of the Rock- 
efeller Foundation, as was John Foster Dulles); 
Secretary of the Treasury Douglas Dillon (a 
member of the board of the Chase Manhattan 
Bank); Director of the U.S. International Bank for 
Reconstruction and Development, Eugene Black 
(Second Vice-President and Director of Chase 
Manhattan); President of the U.N. World Bank, 
John J. McCloy (Chairman of the Board of Chase 
Manhattan, and trustee of the Rockefeller Founda- 
tion, and Chairman of the Executive Committee for 
Squibb Pharmaceutical); 1 Senator Nelson Aldrich 
(whose daughter married John D. Rockefeller, Jr., 
and whose son, Winthrop, became Chairman of the 
Chase National Bank and Ambassador to Great 
Britain); President Nixon and Attorney-General 
John Mitchell (Rockefeller Wall Street attorneys 
for such drug firms as Warner-Lambert); and many 

WcCloy had been Assistant Secretary of War from April 1941 to 
November 1945. As High Commissioner in West Germany after the 
war, he was instrumental in making Konrad Adenauer, his brother-in- 
law, Chancellor of West Germany. He also wasChairnian of the Board 
of the Ford Foundation and chief U.S. disarmament negotiator. 


others far too numerous to mention by name. But 
the list of men who are or were in key positions 
within the Rockefeller group reads like a "Who's 
Who in Government." 

The extent of hidden Rockefeller influence 
within the federal government can be approximated 
by noting that David Rockefeller is Chairman of the 
Council on Foreign Relations and that the CFR is 
sustained financially through grants from the Rock- 
efeller foundations, the Carnegie fund and similarly 
interlocked tax-exempt foundations. 

The CFR is semi-secret in its operation. It 
shuns publicity and members are sworn not to dis- 
close to the public the proceedings of its fconfer- 
ences and briefings. It has a formal membership of 
approximatelyfourteen hundred elite personalities. 

In Harper's magazine for July, T958, there is 
an article entitled "School for Statesmen," written 
by CFR member Joseph Kraft. Boasting that mem- 
bership in this obscure organization had become the 
magic key that opens the door of appointments to 
high government posts, Kraft explained that, even 
then, CFR membership included: 

.... the President, the Secretary of State, 
the Chairman of the Atomic Energy 
Commission, the Director of the Central 
Intelligence Agency, the Board chairmen 
of three of the country's five largest in- 
dustrial corporations, two of the four 
> richest insurance companies, and two of 
the three biggest banks, plus the senior: 
partners of two of the three leading Wall _ 


Street law firms , the publishers of the two 
biggest news magazines and of the 
country's most influential newspaper, 
and the presidents of the Big Three in 
both universities and foundations , as well 
as a score of other college presidents and 
a scattering of top scientists and jour- 
nalists, t 

Rockerfeller's CFR, from behind the scenes, 
has dominated this nation for decades. CFR mem- 
bers include top executives and journalists for the 
New York Times, the Washington Post, the 
Chicago Daily News, the Christian Science 
Monitor, Harper's, Look, Time, Life, Newsweek, 
U.S. News and World Report, the Encyclopedia 
Britannica, CBS, NBC, MGM, the Motion Picture 
Association of America; they include directors of 
the Ford Foundation, the Rockerfeller Founda- 
tion, the Carnegie Endowment Fund, the Kettering 
Foundation and the Sloan Kjettering Institute for 
Cancer Research; they include Presidents Hoover, 
Eisenhower, Johnson, and Nixon; 1 Secretaries of. 
State Stettinius, Acheson, Dulles, Herter, Rusk, 
and Kissinger; a fantastic percentage of the 
.President's Cabinet, Under-Secretaries, the Fed- 

1 According to Dan Smoot's excellent study of the CFR entitled The 
Invisible Government, President Kennedy also had been a member. 
The basis for this claim is a personal letter from the president in which it 
is said that he claimed membership. I have not seen this letter, how- 
ever, and the CFR staff, in a letter to me dated June 11, 1971 , stated 
flatly: "the facts of the matter are that President Kennedy was invited 
to join the Council but, insofar as our records indicate, never accepted 
that invitation either formally or informally through the payment of 
membership dues." In view of this, "I felt it was best to omit President 
Kennedy's name from the list, which is impressive enough without it. 


eral Reserve Board, Ambassadors to other coun- 
tries, Supreme Court Justices, and presidential ad- 
visors. Over one hundred CFR members were ap- 
pointed to key government posts under the Nixon 
-administration alone. And remember, the entire 
membership includes only fourteen hundred men. 
Yes, as Joseph Kraft boasted in his "School for 
Statesmen" article in Harper's, this organization, 
dominated by Rockefeller as chairman of the board, 
and by Rockefeller's economic dependents at all 
^ levels of control, has indeed become the unofficial 
training camp and personnel placement agency for 
practically all positions within the federal govern- 
ment — especially those that relate to U.S. foreign 
' policy and world government. The average person 
has never heard of the CFR, yet it is a major part of 
the unseen government of the United States. 1 

The other p^rt, of course, is ffiore concerned 
with domestic affairs than foreign affairs and 
reaches into every branch of the federal govern- 
ment. The FDA, which we now will examine in 
detail, is merely one example of the success of that 
penetration and control. What will be shown as true 
with the FDA could be duplicated in every other 
agency as well. 

Let us begin by acknowledging that which is 
obvious. The FDA could not have achieved nor 
maintained the puhlic confidence it now enjoys if it 
did not occasionally do some real good. Therecord 
on this point is quite clear. The FDA has nipped 

1 For more information about the CFR, read The Capitalist Conspiracy 
by G. Edward Griffin "(American Media, Thousand Oaks, Calif., 
1971); also, The Invisible Government by Dan Smoot (Western Is- 
lands, Belmont, Mass., 1962). 


many a medical racket in the bud and has clamped 
down on numerous firms that had been guilty of 
unsanitary processing, of selling putrid or con- 
taminated food and of distributing adulterated or 
misbranded drugs. In this it deserves to be com- 
mended for its diligence. As we shall see, however, 
this showcase aspect of the FDA record pales by 
comparison to its other record of ineptitude and 
outright corruption. N ^ 

In March of 1972, after repeated inquiries from 
concerned Congressmen, the FDA made public its 
official cleanliness standards as applied to the food 
processing industry. To everyone's horror it was 
learned that the FDA allows approximately one 
rodent pellet per pint of wheat, ten fly eggs per eight 
and a half ounce can of fruit juice, and fifty insect 
fragments or two rodent hairs for three and a half 
ounces of peanut butter. 1 

For years, the FDA defended the use of the 
hormone Diethylstilbestrol (DES) as an artificial 
fattening agent for cattle. Then, after the evidence 
became too overwhelming to ignore, it was finally 
banned because even tr^ce amounts of this sub- 
stance as residue in the meat was shown to be a 
possible factor in inducing cancer in those humans 
who consumed it. 2 But the same week that it 
banned DES from the cattle to make sure that^ven 
trace amounts could not find their way into human 
consumption, it gave its approval to the "morning- 

l Consumer Reports, March, 1973, p. 152. « 

2 Incidentally, DES is an artificial female sex hormone. The logic for 
the higher incidence of cancer is implicit in the important role played by 
estrogen, in the trophoblastic thesis of cancer. Here is just one more 
grain of evidence added to the mountain. 


after contraceptive" — a pill containing a full fifty 
milligrams of the drug arid to be taken daily for five 
days. As one cattleman commented bitterly: "It 
turns out that a woman would have to eat 262 toris 
of beef liver tQ get the same amount of DES as 
the FDA makes legal for the next-morning 
medication." 1 

Although the subject is not yet totally free from 
its share of controversy, it is now widely recog- 
nized, both in and out of the medical profession, 
that there is a definite relationship between heart 
attacks and high cholesterol diets. With each pas- 
sing year, the clinical evidence to support this view 
continues to grow. But evidence does not daunt the 
king's soothsayers at the FDA whose official posi- 
tion on cholesterol, even as late as 1965, was this: 

Any claim, direct or implied, in the label- 
ing of fats or oils . . . that they prevent or 
mitigate or cure diseases of the heart or 
arteries, is false or misleading, and con- 
stitutes misbranding within the meaning 
of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic 
Act. 2 

There are approximately 2,500 chemical addi- 
tives currently being used by the food industry for 
the purpose of flavoring, coloring, preserving, and 
generally altering the characteristics of its prO- 

^'On Science/' by David O. Woodbury, Review of the News, June 13, 
1973, p. 27, 

2 Hearings Before the Senate Subcommittee on Administrative Prac- 
tices and Procedures, 1965, Part 2. 


ducts. The safety factor on most of these has not 
been determined — or even investigated — by the 
FDA. 1 As in the case of DESy the evidence is 
strong that many of them are harmful, particularly if 
consumed over a prolonged period of time. The 
FDA response to this situation is extremely in- 
teresting. Instead of rushing into battle to "protect 
the people," as it has done in the case of those 
"dangerous" health foods and vitamins, it warmly 
embraces and defends the cartel food processors 
and chemical firms that otherwise might be dam- 
aged by loss of markets. 

The following statements, taken directly from 
official FDA "Fact Sheets," 2 tell the story with no 
need of further comment: 

In general, there is little difference be- 
tween fresh and processed foods. Mod- 
ern processing methods retain most vita- 
min and mineral values .... 

Nutrition Research has shown that a diet 
containing' white bread made with en- 
riched Jftour has nearly the same value as 
one containing whole grain bread .... 

Chemical fertilizers are not poisoning our 
soil. Modern fertilizers are needed to 
produce enough food for our 
population . . . ? 

14t Food Additives," Scientific American, March, 1972, p. 20. 
2 ;Fact Sheets for July, 1971 and CSS-F11 for Nov. 1971. ' 


When pesticides on food crops leave a 
residue, FDA and the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) make sure the 
amount will be safe for consumers . . . .* 

Vitamins are specific chemical com- 
pounds, and the human body can use 
them equally well whether they are 
synthesized by a chemist' or by 
nature . 

In November of 197 1 , the FDA issued a "Fact 
Sheet" on the subject of "quackery." It says: 

The term "quackery" encompasses 
both people and products .... Broadly 
speaking, quackery is misinformation 
about health: 

If the preceeding hogwash about DES, choles- 
terol and the glories of processed foods, chemical 
fertilizers, pesticides, and synthetic vitamins is not 
"misinformation §bout health," then there is 
nothing that could be so labeled! 

The Oxford Universal Dictionary defines a 
quack as "one who professes knowledge concern- 
ing subjects of which he is ignorant." By either 
definition, FDA spokesmen are the biggest quacks 
the world has ever seen, and its about time that the 
American people began to recognize them as such. 

lr The reader is reminded that the chemical fertilizer and pesticide 
industries are, like the drug industry, "but subsidiaries of the larger 
cartelized chemical and petroleum industries. 


There is an important distinction between a 
quack and a charlatan. A quack may be presumed 
an honest man who truly thinks he is helping his 
patients. A charlatan, on the other hand, is fully 
aware of the inadequacy of both his knowledge and 
his treatment. A man, therefore, can be a quack, or 
both a quack and. a. charlatan. 

Unfortunately, there is a lot more than mere 
quackery within the FDA. 

In 1960, during the much publicized investiga- 
tion of the drug industry conducted by the Senate, it 
was revealed that many top FDA officials had been 
receiving extra-curricular financial "incentives" 
from some of the very companies they were sup- 
posed to regulate. For example, Dr. Henry Welch, 
director of the FDA Antibiotic Division, had been 
paid $287,000 in kick-backs (he called them "hon- 
orariums") that were derived from a percentage of 
drug advertising secured for leading medical jour- 
nals. His superiors were fully aware of this conflict 
of interest but difl nothing to terminate it. It was 
only after the fact was. made public and caused 
embarrassment to the administration that Welch 
was asked to resign. 

In 1940, an incident occurred that, had it been 
widely publicized, perhaps would have shocked the 
nation into realizing that the FDA was not protect- 
ing the people, but was protecting the cartelists 
instead. It was at that time that Winthrop Chemical 
was under fire for shipping 400,000 tablets labelled 
as "Sulfathiazole," which were found later to con- 
tain five grains of Luminal each. One or two grains 
of Luminal puts people to sleep. Five grains puts 


some of them to sleep permanently. These tablets 
are known to have killed seventeen victims in vari- 
ous parts of the country. Winthrop Chemical failed 
to notify the public immediately of the fatally 
poisonous character of the pills. Instead, the com- 
pany, with the aid, and approval of the A.M. A. 
Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry of the Ameri- 
can Medical Association, continued to push the 
sale of the Sulfathiazole pills, thus increasing the 
number of fatalities. The FDA was sympathetic 
toward Winthrop Chemical and extremely helpful. 
Exercising their bureaucratic powers, Dr. Klumpp, 
head of the FDA drug division, and his superior, 
FDA Commissioner Campbell, refrained from 
prosecuting for the deaths. They helped to hush up 
the matter and merely revoked Winthrop's license 
to ship Sulfathiazole for three months, after the 
market had been glutted with the product. The sus- 
pension of shipment for three months was an utterly 
meaningless gesture. Commenting on this revolting 
episode, Ambruster adds: 

Dr. Klumpp, by this time, had moved 
onward and upward. He had accepted a 
position awarded him by Dr. Fishbein 
and became Director of the A.M. A. divi- 
sion on food and drugs and secretary of its 
Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry (the 
same council that had "accepted" 
Winthrop's Sulfathiazole and approved 
its advertising). And Dr. -Klumpp kept 
moving. Not long thereafter, Edward S. 


Rogers, chairman of the Board of Sterling 
Products, announced that Dr. Klumpp 
had been elected president of Winthrop. 1 

Some years later, an antibiotic drug by the 
name of Chloramphenicol was manufactured and 
distributed by Parke- Davis and Company. Shortly 
after its release, reports began to appear in the 
medical literature to the effect that Chloram- 
phenicol was responsible for blood toxicity and 
leukopenia (destruction of the white blood cells), 
and that it had caused several deaths from aplastic 

The man who was director of the FDA's 
Bureau of Medicine at that time — and the man who 
could have ordered Parke-Davis to withdraw this 
drug from the market — was Dr. Joseph F. Sadusk. 
Instead of clamping down on Parke-Davis, how- 
ever, Sadusk used his official position to prevent the 
drug from being recalled, and even ruled against 
requiring a precautionary label. 

Finally, in 1969, after the drug had earned a 
substantial profit for its producer, and after it had 
been replaced by a newer product, Parke-Davis 
Was allowed to get off the hook merely by sending a 
letter to all physicians stating that chloramphenicol 
was no longer the drug of choice for any of the 
infections it originally had been designed to cure. 

Soon afterward, Dr. Sadusk left the FDA, 
supposedly to work at his alma mater, Johns Hop- 
kins University. But, within the year, the pay-off 

'Ambruster, Treason's Peace, op. cit., p. 213; 


was complete: He became vice-president of 
Parke- Davis and Company. 

Dr. Sadusk's successor was Dr. Joseph M. Pi- 
sani who shortly resigned to work for The Proprie- 
tary Association, the trade association that repre- 
sents the manufacturers of non-prescription drugs 
— a major part of the very industry Dr. Pisani had 

Dr. Pisani was replaced by Dr. Robert J. 
Robinson, whose stay was even shorter than that of 
his predecessor. He became a top executive at 
Hoffman-La Roche, a leading manufacturer of pre- 
scription drugs. 

Omar Garrison, in his splendidly researched 
book, The Dictocrats, continues the list: 

Dr. Howard Cohn, former head of 
FDA's medical evaluation, who made a 
profitable transition from the agency to 
Ciba Pharmaceutical Company; 

. Dr. Harold Anderson, chief of FDA's 
division of anti-infective drugs, who ter- 
minated his government employment to 
take a position with Winthrop 

Morris Yakowitz, who felt that a job with 
Smith, Kline and French Laboratories 
would offer greater personal rewards 
than his post as head of case supervision 
for FDA; and 


Allen E. Rayfield, former director of 
Regulatory Compliance; who chucked 
his enforcement duties (including elec- 
tronic spying) to become a consultant to 
Richardson-Merrell, Inc. 1 . 

In 1964, under pressure from Congress, the 
FDA released a list of its officials who, during the 
preceding five years, had left the agency for em- 
ploymenUn industry. Out of the eight'hundred and 
thirteen names appearing on that list, eighty-three 
— better than ten percent — had taken positions 
with companies they previously regulated. Many of 
these people, of course, were from the very top 
FDA echelons of management — men who were 
charged with making decisions and issuing direc- 
tives. Not only that, while these men were with the 
FDA, they had access to extensive information 
regarding the research and processes of all com- 
panies. When they went to work for one of those 
companies, therefore, there is no reason why they 
couldn't have taken that information with them 
which, quite obviously, could put the firm that hired 
them at a tremendous advantage over its com- 

Here, again, we find the classic pattern of 
government bureaucratic power being used, not for 
the protection of the people as is its excuse for 
being, but for the aggrandizement of individuals 
holding that power and for the elimination of honest 
competition in the market place. The voters 

'Op. tit., pp. 70, 71. 


approve one extension of government power after 
another always fn the naive expectation that, some- 
how, they will benefit. But, in the end, they inevita- 
bly find themselves merely supporting a larger 
bureaucracy through increased taxes, paying 
higher prices for their consumer goods and losing 
one more chunk of personal freedom. 

There are almost no exceptions to this rule, as 
will be obvious if one but reflects for a moment on 
the results of government entry into such areas of 
economic activity as prices and wages, energy con- 
servation, environmental protection, health care 
and so on. 

As the Frenchman, Frederic Bastiat, observed 
well over a hundred years ago, once government is 
allowed to expand beyond its prime role of protect- 
ing the lives, liberty and property of its citizens; 
once it invades the market place and attempts to 
redistribute the nation's wealth or resources, in- 
evitably it falls into the hands of those who will use 
it for "legalized plunder. v ' There is no better way to 
describe the governments of the world today — 
and the government of the United States is no ex- 

The FDA was added to the ever-lengthening 
list of government regulatory agencies in 1906, 
largely as a result of the crusading efforts of a 
government chemist by the name of Harvey 
. Washington Wiley. Spurred on largely by the or- 
ganized dairy industry which wanted the govern- 
ment to pass laws which would hinder competition 
from non-dairy substitutes, Wiley became nation- 
ally famous through his books and speeches against 


, "fraud and poison" in our food. Pioneering the 
pattern that was followed many years later by 
Ralgh Nader, Wiley succeeded in drumming up 
tremendous support from both the public and in 
Congress for government regulation and "protec- 
tion." The result was the Pure Food and Drug Act 
of 1906 which created the FDA and gave it wide 
powers over the food and drug industries. Wiley 
became its first director. 

The first major revision of the Food and Drug 
Act came in 1938 as a result of a fatal blunder made 
by the chief chemist at the S.E. Massengill Com- 
pany of Tennessee. The previous year, one 
hundred and seven people — mostly children — had 
died from ingesting an anti-biotic substance known 
as "Elixir of Sulfanilamide." The chemist had 
tested the compound for appearance, flavor and 
fragrance, but had not tested it for safety. 

The attendant publicity resulted in public ac- 
ceptance of increased powers to the FDA requiring 
all drug manufacturers to test each new compound 
for safety and to submit the results of those tests to 
the agency for approval prior to marketing. The 
FDA also was empowered to remove from the 
market any existing substance k believed to be un- 

From a strictly theoretical point of view, the 
first part of this law was beyond reproach, but the 
second part was a colossal mistake. It is logical to 

. require a food or drugjnanufacturer to take reason- 
able steps to insure the safety of his product. It is 
also logical to require him to place appropriate 
warnings on his product labels where there is a 


possibility that its improper use could result in 
harm. But to give a government agency the power 
to prohibit the marketing of a substance because it 
feels it is unsafe — this was the crack in the dyke 
that eventually destroyed the barrier against the 
rushing floodwaters of favoritism and corruption. 
After all, most drugs could be removed from the 
shelves on the truthful assertion that they are un- 
safe; and, as we have seen, the process by which 
some are removed and others allowed to remain is 
not always a scientific one. 

As Science magazine reported: 

The FDA is not a happy place for scien- 
tists to work .... Several researchers 
showed the students [who were gathering 
data on the FDA] atrocity logs in which 
they kept detailed accounts of assaults on 
their scientific integrity .... The most 
common complaint was that the FDA 
"constantly interferes" with medium and 
long-range research projects, at least 
partly from fear that the results will em- 
barrass the agency. The students also 
. criticized the FDA for retaliating against 
scientists who disagree with its position. 1 

Granting the government the power to sup- 
press products because of allegedly being "unsafe" 
was bad enough. But it was nothing compared to the 

144 Nader's Raiders on the FDA: Science and Scientists 'Misused' 
Science, April 17, 1970, pp. 349-352. ' 


fiasco that was enshrined into law as the 
Kefauver-Harris amendments to the Food and 
Drug Act on October 10, 1962. Following in the 
wake of the publicity given to the deformed babies 
born to European mothers who had taken the drug 
thalidamide, the new law gave the FDA the power, 
to eliminate any drug product that it claimed was 
ineffective as well! 

The thalidamide scare, of course, had abso- 
lutely no bearing on the new law. First of all, 
thalidamide was not being used in the United 
States. And secondly, the birth defects were not 
caused by a lack of the drug's "effectiveness," but 
lack of adequate testing to determine "safety" arid 
long-range side effects. 1 

It is almost impossible to prove that any par- 
ticular drug is effective . What will work for one may 
not work for another. The test of effectiveness 
often is a subjective evaluation on the part of the 
user. Effectiveness can be determined only by the 
patient either alone or with consultation with his 
physician. Putting such power into the hands of 
political appointees with their almost unbroken rec- 
ord of corruption throughout the years is sheer 
madness. And, as we shall see in a following chap- 
ter, it is precisely this aspect of the "protection 
racket" that has prevented Laetrile from being 

1 Incidentally, thalidamide has since been shown to be highly effective 
in the treatment of leprosy patients and has been credited with saving 
many lives. But, because of government restrictions.oints manufacture 
and use, many leprosy patients are being denied the drug which, to 
them, could mean the difference between life and death. See 
"Thalidamide Combats Leprosy," (AP), Boston Globe, June 29, 
1969, p. 50. Also, 44 Horror Drug Thalidamide Now Used to Save Lives 
of Leprosy Patients/' National Enquirer, Nov. 25, 1973;' p. 50. 


available in the United States and, thus, has been 
responsible for the needless suffering and death of 

Perhaps it should be mentioned just for the 
record — although it should be obvious without 
saying — that by far most of the employees of the 
FDA are honest and conscientious citizens who are 
not participants in fraud, corruption, or favoritism. 
Most of these people, however, are at the lower 
echelons and have practically no voice in the 
policies of the agency they serve. But the higher one 
climbs within the structure, the greater become the 
temptations, and the very highest positions of all 
are reserved for those who have demonstrated their 
talents, not in the field of science where truth is 
king, but. in the field of politics where truth, often as 
not, is chained in the deepest dungeon as a danger- 
ous enemy to the throne. 

The result of concentrated government power, 
however, is almost as deadly when wielded by hon- 
est men as it is in the hands of those who are dishon- 
est. This point was brought home quite convinc- 
ingly by Lynn Kinsky and Robert Poole in an 
analysis prepared by them for Reason magazine. 
Discussing the impossibility of determining drug 
"effectiveness vs. ineffectiveness" for populations 
as a whole, they wrote: 

The uppermost concern of the bureaucra- 
tic mind is rules and procedures expres- 
sed in countless official forms and paper- 
work. The inference, in the FDA's case, 
is that if the bureaucrat does not know 


how to ensure that a drug is "effective," 
the next best thing is to require such a 
mountain of paperwork that the bureau- 
crat is "covered" at every possible turn. 
As a result, since the FDA began requir- 
ing "effectiveness" documentation, the 
length of time it takes to get a New Drug 
Application processed has tripled. Pre- 
paring the monumental paperwork adds 
millions of dollars to a drug firm's re- 
search budget — which has the effect of 
discouraging smaller (perhaps more in- 
novative) firms from even attempting to 
get new drugs approved. 1 

It bears repeating that the FDA could not long 

maintain public confidence if it did not occasionally 
go after a few genuine villains. Generally speaking, 
however, these culprits turn out to be individuals or 
relatively small-time operators. T-he industrial 
giants often are guilty of the same offenses, but the 
FDA extends to them an unofficial favored status. 
One of the reasons for this double standard is that 
the larger Companies have the financial resources to 
challenge the FDA's actions in the courts, a proce- 
dure that often reveals the shabbiness of the 
agency's work, thus damaging its public image. 
Since the FDA is especially interested in the favor- 
able publicity resulting from its efforts to "protect 
the people," it quite naturally prefers to pick on the 
little guy who cannot afford to fight back. 

144 The Impact of FDA Regulations on Drug Research in America 
Today," by Lynn Kinsley and Robert Poole, Reason, Vol. 2, No. 9, 
reprint, pp. 9, 10. 


In 1962, for example, the FDA, in cooperation 
with state, health officials, seized a supply of 
safflower oil capsules in a small Detroit store on the 
basis that they were being used to promote the 
book, Calories Don't Count, by Herman Taller, 
M.D. It is widely accepted today that, indeed, in a 
dietary program, calories do not count for many 
people nearly as much as do the carbohydrates. 
But, in 1962, the FDA had declared that this book 
should not be read by the American people, and 
especially that safflower oil capsules could not be 
sold in any way that connected them with the theme 
of the book. This, in their great wisdom, was de- 
clared as false labeling. 

Following standard procedure, the FDA tip- 
ped off the local news media that a seizure was 
about to take place, and, as a result, when the 
officials arrived on the scene, members of the press 
were on hand to fully document and photograph the 
great raid. Needless to say, the public was both 
impressed and grateful to learn that their FDA was 
on the job "protecting" them from such unscrupu- * 
lous merchant's of fraud. 

The main point, however, is that the city's 
largest department store also had been displaying 
the books and capsules. But, prior to the raid on the 
smaller store, the FDA had called the officials of 
the larger store, advised them of the pending sei- 
zure, and suggested that they could avoid embar- 
rassing publicity if they would merely remove the 
offending merchandise quietly and voluntarily. The 
agency had correctly reasoned that it could accom- 
plish its goal better by picking on the little guy and 


avoiding a confrontation with a firm that had the 
resources to fight back. 

Sometimes the failure to treat the big operators 
with the same harshness as the small is due, not to 
the fact that they are large, but because they are 
"in." They are part of the cartel establishment. For 
example, during the 1970 hearings before the House 
Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Relations, it 
was revealed that a small journal was forced by the 
FDA to publish a retraction of certain statements 
contained in an advertisement for an oral con- 
traceptive. But the large and prestigious New Eng- 
land Journal of Medicine which carried the same 
ad was not required to publish any retraction at all. 
When asked about this discrepancy, FDA Com- 
missioner Charles Edwards replied that the larger 
magazine "didn't really mean to offend." 1 

This is not to say, of course, that the FDA 
never tackles a larger firm, for occasionally it does. 
But, when it does, you can be sure that the cards are 
stacked against the defendant. Regardless of one's 
financial resources, unless he is part of the interna- 
tional finpol interlock, he cannot hope to match the 
unlimited resources of the federal government. Pri- 
vate citizens must hire attorneys. The government 
has buildings full of attorneys on the tax payroll just 
waiting to justify their salaries. It matters not in the 
least to the FDA how long the litigation drags on, 
for the delays, postponements, and continuations 
actually are part of its strategy to bankrupt the 
defendant with astronomical legal expenses. 

144 Who Blocks Testing of Anti-Cancer Agent? '," Alameda Times Star 
(Calif.), Aug. 3, 1970. 


In the court proceedings against Dr. Andrew 
Ivy, for example, the trial lasted for almost ten 
months. Testimony of 288 witnesses filled 11,900 
pages of transcript — enough to make a stack seven 
feet high. It is estimated that the FDA spent be- 
tween three and five million dollars of the 
taxpayers' money; There is no way that the average 
citizen can hope to match that kind of legal offen- 

On top of this financial handicap, the defendant 
must face the fact that there are very few judges or 
juries who will have the courage to decide a case 
against the FDA, whose attorneys are adept at 
planting in their minds that if they should do so, and 
if they are wrong, they will be personally responsi- 
ble for thousands of deaths. Under this kind of 
intimidation, a judge or jury is almost always in- 
clined to conclude that they will leave the scientific 
questions up to the scientific experts (the FDA!), 
and that they will concern themselves strictly with 
the questions of law. . 

However, even in those cases where the 
court's verdict is favorable to the defendant, he 
often must face the wrath of FDA officials who then 
make it a point to harass him and, hopefully, to 
initiate additional law suits. 

Commenting on this aspect of the protection 
racket, Omar Garrison writes: 

During the course of a legal battle which 
appeared to be going against the govern- 
ment, a ranking FDA official told the de- 
fense attorney: "If this case plays out, we 


will just work up another lawsuit, you 

. It was fiot an idle threat. There is 
documented evidence to show that, in 
case after case, a respondent exonerated 
by the court has emerged from the ordeal 
(often exhausted and bankrupt) only to be 
faced with a second or even third 
indictment .... The dictocrats seem to 
reason that sooner or later a defendant 
will exhaust his financial resources and 
lose the will to defend himself when he 
realizes that he is pitted against the limit- 
less potential of the national 
government. 1 

The limitless potential of the national govern- 
ment includes a lot more than a battery of tax- 
supported lawyers. Once an individual has incurred 
the wrath of the FDA, he can expect to find himself 
the target of harassment from other agencies of the 
federal government as well. Probably first at his 
door will be the man from IRS to scrutinize his tax 
records with a determination to find something 
wrong. If the defendant sells a product, the Federal 
Trade Commission wiirtake a highly personal in- 
terest in his operations. If he has programs on radio 
or television, the stations that carry his message 
will be contacted by the Federal Communications 
Commission and reminded that such programing is 
not in the best public interest. The man from OSH A 

^mar Garrison, The Dictocrats, op. cit., pp. 153, 156. 


(Occupational Safety and Health Administration) 
surely will want to examine his facilities for possible 
(inevitable) violations of obscure safety and health 
codes. The Fair Employment Practices Commis- 
sion may suddenly discover unacceptable employ- 
ment or hiring practices. If he is a physician, he can 
look forward to closer attention from PSRO (Pro- 
fessional Standards Review Organization) to eval- 
uate his judgment in the care of his patients. As a 
last result, he may even find himself the object of 
Post Office action resulting in the denial of such a 
basic business necessity as the, delivery of mail. 
And superimposed upon all these actions there has 
been the constant and conscious effort of the FDA 
to secure maximum exposure in the mass com- 
munications media for the dual purpose of per- 
petuating its own image of "protecting the people" 
while at the same time destroying the reputations 
and businesses of those it has singled out for attack. 
The advance notice to the press corps of a planned 
raid or arrest thus becomes an essential part of the 
FDA's strategy. Even if the defendant eventually is 
exonerated in court, he will be viewed by the gen- . 
eral public as criminally suspect because of the 
lingering impact of the dramatic news stories and 
pictures of his arrest. The economic damage done 
to the defendant as a result of this carefully con- 
trived publicity often is far greater than any fine or 
penalty that could be imposed in court. 

Lest this sweeping indictment sound too harsh 
or exaggerated, let us turn our attention next to 
specific examples and actual cases. 





Specific examples of government 

harassment of the organic 

ftutrition and vitamin industry; 

the important role played by the 

mass communications media in 

discrediting Laetrile in the public 

mind; and a comparison of the 

cost of typical Laetrile therapy 

with that of orthodox 

cancer treatments. 

As touched upon briefly in the proceeding 
chapter, one of the principal weapons in the FDA's 
arsenal of compliance is the press release and the 
pre-arranged news coverage of raids and arrests. 
Trial by manipulated public opinion can be of far 
more consequence than trial by jury. The defen- 
dant, even if innocent of the charges against him — 
or, more likely, even if guilty of the charges per se 
but innocent of any real wrong-doing — will forever 
carry the stigma of suspected guilt in the eyes of the 

Basically, this is the rationale behind the 
"cyanide scare" publicity given to Laetrile and 
apricot kernels. The honest scientific verdict is that 



these substances are as safe as almost any edible 
thing can be, Yet, the public knows only that they 
have been labeled as "dangerous" and that those 
who promote their use are not to be trusted. 

The mass communications media has been all 
too willing to cooperate in this venture. The reason 
is not that the major news outlets are firmly in the 
hands of the same international finpols who domi- 
nate the federal government — true though that 
may be 1 — it merely is due to the fact that newsmen, 
like everyone else, do not like to work more than 
they have to and, consequently, are inclined to 
accept ready-made stories with a minimum of inde- 
pendent research — plus the fact that most of them 
have never had any reason to question the expertise 
or the integrity of FDA spokesmen. In other 
words, like the rest of the population at large, most 
tfewsmen have a lot yet to learn about the inherent 
qualities of big government. The result of this real- 
ity is that the press and the electronics media have, 
for all practical purposes, become the propaganda 
arms of the FDA. 

To illustrate this point, there is an inexhausti- 
ble supply of slanted or biased news stories, of 
which the following examples are typical. 

Mrs: Mary Whelchel had operated a boarding 
house on the American side of the Mexican bound- 
ary near San Diego for the use of cancer patients 
under the care of Dr. Contreras. To her it was far 
more of a mercy mission than it was a commercial 

'See the discussion of the CFR in the previous chapter. Also note that 
the Hearst empire nasi been in the Rockefeller orbit since 1932 when it 
was saved from financial collapse by a $25,000,000 loan from the Chase 
National Bank. 


enterprise. Yet, in February of 1971, she was ar- 
rested and thrown in jail because she had provided 
Laetrile for her boarders. 

Shortly after her release, Mrs. Whelchel wrote 
an open letter for publication in the Cancer News 
Journal. Here, in her own words, is what hap- 
pened: _ " , 

Dear Friends, 

Most of you will know by the time 
this letter reaches you that on Feb. 25, 
1971 at 12:30 p.m., Charles Duggie 
(California Food and Drug Officer); Fred 
Vogt (San Diego D. A. Office), Frances 
Holway (San Diego police matron), and 
John McDonald (Imperial Beach Police) 
came to my home and arrested me for 
"selling, giving away and distributing" 
Laetrile as a CURE for cancer. 

I was also accused of spreading 
"propaganda" to people to get them to go 
to Mexican doctors instead of their medi- 
cal advisors in the States. ... I jvas told 
they had papers to "search and seize" 
and that I was under arrest. They pro- 
ceeded to go through my house like a 
tornado. Everything was removed from 
my files, desk and shelves, including 
checks, personaMetters, receipts and 
books. One word covers it — EVERY- 

Finally, at 4:00 p.m. I was taken to 
the county jail to be booked and 


mugged. ... I was put in the "drunk 
tank," and there I stayed. . . . 

As I sat in that horrible jail and 
, looked around at the four barren walls, 
andthe drunks, prostitutes, dope addicts 
— plus it had no windows, and mattresses 
were thrown helter-skelter on the floor — 
I had time to reflect over the past eight 
years. At first I asked myself: "How and 
why did I get here?" I was panic stricken! 
For a person who has never broken the 
law, outside of a traffic ticket or two, in a 
lifetime — here I was in jail! 

It is terribly frightening. You are cut 
completely off from civilization it seems. , 
No way to contact a soul! Other than the 
call to my sons, I had no way of knowing 
if any thing, was being done to get me out . I 
was not allowed to talk to anyone, but the 
inmates. Most of them were too drunk or 
high to understand a word. As time 
passed (there are no clocks) and no 
word came from the outside, I felt like the 
forgotten man; in my case, the forgotten 
woman! / 

I believe in Laetrile wholeheartedly. 
I believe with all my heart that it is the 
answer to the control of cancer. After 
living twenty-four hours a day for eight 
years with cancer patients, how could 
there be a single doubt? I came up with 
my answer. Yes, it has been worth every 
minute of it, and regardless of how the 


"trial comes out, I want to say now, for the 
record, I would do the same thing, the 
very same thing all over again. 1 

For comparison, let us see how this incident 
was treated in the press. All across the country, 
newspapers picked up the story as it first had been 
planted in The New York Times. Headlines 
IN CALIFORNIA. The public was led to believe 
that the FDA had launched a daring raid on one of 
the most dangerous and despicable criminals of the 
Twentieth Century smuggling "illicit drugs" into 
the country and preying upon innocent, helpless, 
and desperate cancer victims. 

It said: 

California food and drug agents moved 
this week to break up what they described 
as an "underground railroad" that has 
been transporting cancer victims into 
Mexico for treatment with a drug that is 
banned in'the United States and Canada. 

Charges of criminal conspiracy and fraud 
were lodged against Mrs. Mary C. Whel- 
chel whose boarding house has been a 
haven for cancer patients from all parts of 
the United States en route to Mexico for 
treatment with the so-called wonder 
drug. . . . 

dancer News Journal, Jan./ Apr., 1971, p. 14. 


The Mexican authorities are also looking 
into the operation of the cancer clinics. 1 

"CLINIC RING," indeed! 

Most local police departments are pushovers 
for the FDA quacks. They often accept FDA pro- 
nouncements at face value. Consequently, they 
usually can be counted on to cooperate fully in any 
investigation or arrest. Sometimes, a police inves- 
tigator, without realizing that he has been deceived 
by FDA propaganda, concludes that Laetrile 
"smugglers" are really no different from dope 
pushers dealing in heroin. When such lawmen are 
interviewed by the press, they become extremely 
quotable and helpful to the FDA. 

The following news article from the Seattle 
Post-Intelligence i? a classic example: 

Belle vue — At least five Washington resi- 
dents including two doctors have been 
linked with sales of an illegal anti-cancer 
drug known as Laetrile, a result of a 
month long investigation by Bellevue 
police, the P-I has learned. 

Detectives conducting the probe yester^ 
day said they may have only scratched 
the surface of a drug sales operation cov- 
ering several states and Mexico. . . . 

Two motives appear to exist for those 
advocating Laetrile, according to Belle- 

J k4 Cancer Clinic Ring Seized in California/* New York Times Service, 
The Arizona Republic, Feb. 28, 1971, p. 24- A. 


vue detective Bill Ellis, heading the in- 
vestigation. "Some of those involved 
may believe that the drug actually works 
to cure or halt the progress of cancer," 
Ellis said. 

44 But we can't rule out the profit motive, ' ' 
he added. 

"There is a lot of money to be made sell- 
ing this drug/'. . . 

4 'Every indication is that patients are re- 
quired to stay on the drug/or life," Ellis 
said. "This makes an ideal situation for a 
bunco artist, preying on desperate people 
who feel theyhave nothing to lose." 

Police also are concerned that those tout- 
ing Laetrile for the profit motive may find 
it just as lucrative and as simple to import 
other drugs including heroin. 

"If a person can successfully smuggle 
one illegal drug into the U.S. in substan- 
tial quantities, what is to prevent them 
from diversifying," Ellis posed. 1 

The heavy hand of FDA propaganda is evident 
in this "news" story, and it is likely that neither 
detective Ellis nor the reporter are even remotely 
aware that they had become victimized by real 
bunco artists of the first order. 

1 " Five Linked to Sale of Illegal Cancer Drug,'* Dec. 21 , 1972, pp. 1 , 5. 


Aside from the completely ludicrous and dis- 
honest innuendo about Laetrile advocates "possi- 
bly" smuggling heroin (there never has been a 
single shred of evidence to justify this suspicion), 
one of the favorite FDA lines is that those who 
distribute Laetrile are making exorbitant profits. 
As a matter of fact, the California Department of 
Public Health, in its publication The Cancer Law, 
claimed that essentially the same material could be 
purchased substantially cheaper under the com- 
mercial name of Amygdalin, and the American 
Cancer Society has even gone to such ludicrous 
extremes as to say that Laetrile used in an injection 
actually costs only ten to fifteen cents. 1 

Let us examine the facts. 

First of all, the average cost of one gram of 
injectible Laetrile in 1974 was approximately three 
dollars, which makes it just about the cheapest in- 
jectible in the doctor's office. 

Perhaps the biggest factor influencing the price 
of Laetrile, however, is that the government has 
made it illegal to use as an anti-cancer agent. This 
has forced its source of supply into a black market 
operation which, because of its need for secrecy 
and the ever-present possibility of arrest, fines, or 
imprisonment, always inflates the price of any 
commodity in order to cover the extra expenses of 
smuggling and to compensate the suppliers for their 
risk. If the government would remove its legal re- 
straints, Laetrile could be manufactured and sold in 
the United States by mass production and distribu- 

*AC$ quoted in "Cancer Relief or Quackery?** Washington Post, 
May 26, 1974, pp. CI, C4. 


tion techniques which, in a very short time, proba- 
bly would bring its price down to less than one-third 
of its present level. 

And speaking of exorbitant costs and profits, 
why doesn't the FDA concern itself over these 
matters within the field of orthodox medicine? 

In an article in the San Francisco Chronicle 
entitled "Beware the Quick Cancer Cure," Dr. 
Ralph Weilerstein of the California FDA's Adviso- 
ry Council expressed shock and concern over the 
fact *hat a typical thirty day Laetrile treatment in 
Mexico may cost a patient between one thousand 
and two thousand dollars. First of all, these figures 
were grossly exaggerated. As Time magazine re- 
ported in 1971: 

Contreras' claims for Laetrile are as 
modest as his fees. The doctor charges 
only $ 1 for a first visit, $7 for subsequent 
visits. $3 for a gram of the drug. 1 

According to Dr. Contreras, his total medical 
charges seldom have exceeded seven hundred to a 
thousand dollars. Most of his patients are from out 
of the country, however, and so they also must pay 
for lodging, meals, and transportation. The total 
expense may run as high as two. thousand dollars, 
but it is unfair to imply that it is all going into the 
doctor's pocket as pure profit. 

If Dr. Weilerstein wants to compare apples 
with apples, let him explain why it is that a terminal • 
cancer patient undergoing orthodox therapy in the 

'"Debate Over Laetrile/' Time, April 12, 1971. 


United States will spend, on the average, thirteen 
thousand dollars "on surgery, radiology, 
chemotherapy, hospitalization, or a combination of 
them all. May we suggest that, if the FDA really 
wants to get into areas where it can express shock 
and concern, this is virgin territory long awaiting 

Needless to say, establishment newspapers 
and magazines have been reliable and unquestion- 
ing outlets for FDA propaganda. So, too, have the 
major networks and most of the local radio and TV 
stations. A perfect example was NBC's "First 
Tuesday" program broadcast on March 2, 197 1 . To 
the average viewer who knew none of the back- 
ground, this program undoubtedly appeared to be 
an objective documentary. Mr. Ed Delaney, the 
program's host, indeed, did have filmed interviews 
of people representing both sides of the con- 
troversy. But, as is so often the case, the opinion of 
the viewer actually was predetermined by careful . 
selection and film editing of who was allowed to say 
what, and in what sequence. 

There are hundreds of cancer patients seeking 
the. services of Dr. Contreras' clinic every day. 
They come from all age groups, all walks of life, and 
from all educational backgrounds. Yet, NBC inter- 
viewed only those patients who were relatively in- 
articulate or who would appear to be ignorant, con- 
fused, and desperate. None of them were allowed 
to tell of any help they might have received from 
Laetrile, so the resulting impression was that no 
one actually had benefited. 


Then came the lengthy "rebuttal" — highly 
organized and polished interviews with Dr. Jesse 
Steinfeld, the Surgeon General of the United 
States, Dr. CharlesCdwards, head of the FDA, and 
other "highly respectable" establishment physi- 
cians. The overwhelming conclusion was that 
"Laetrile may sound fine in theory, but it just 
doesn't work!" 

The Laetrile advocates who had trustingly 
cooperated with NBC in the preparation of the 
program were stunned. They had been led to be- 
lieve that they would be given a fair hearing before 
the court of public opinion but, from the very be- 
ginning, they never even had a chance. 

Under the label of "public service broadcast- 
ing," the nation's TV stations have put anti- 
nutrition propaganda films on the air literally 
thousands of times and at no charge to their spon- 
sors. The AMA's film called Medicine Man, for 
example, portrays health lecturers as pitch men and 
crooks, and cleverly instructs the viewer how to 
spot their "techniques." What the film actually 
does, however, is to lump all health lecturers into 
one bag — the good and the bad together, and to 
make blanket statements and observations that ob- 
viously are true when applied to the bad but that are 
false when applied to the good. The result is that the 
viewer tends to become programmed to react nega- 
tively against all of them, and because he is looking 
for "techniques, "rather than "substance," he thus 
is effectively conditioned to reject the responsible 
health lecturer along with the irresponsible. To him 


all health lecturers are charlatans because they all 
use some of the same "techniques" as those used in 
the film. It does not occur to him that most Qf the 
same or similar techniques are used by all lecturers 
on all subjects — particularly those who are lectur- 
ing against health lecturers! 

Another propaganda film with a similar ap- 
proach was produced by the American Gancer 
Society and is called Journey Into Darkness. 
Featuring guest star Robert Ryan as the host, the 
film is a masterpiece of scripting and acting. Weav- 
ing several stories into one, it portrays the mental 
torture experienced by several cancer victims as 
they grapple with the decision of whether they 
should take the advice of their wise and kindly 
doctor and pursue pro ven orthodox treatments with 
a very high chance of recovery, or should they 
allow their fears and doubts to overcome their 
judgment and seek the unproven and suspect treat- 
ments of a medically untrained quack who promises 
miracle cures but whose only real interest is in how 
much money the patient can afford to pay. In the 
end, some make the "right" choice and resolve to 
follow the guidance of their doctor. Others make 
the "wrong" choice and begin their long and tragic 
journey into darkness. 

To the uninformed, this film undoubtedly is 
extremely convincing. Because they know that 
cancer quackery does exist, they are misled into 
accepting that anything not approved by the ACS 
automatically falls into that category. They do not 
stop to realize that the people they watched on the 
screen were merely actors, that the story was not 


real, or that the script was written in conformity to 
the propaganda objectives of the FDA. Neverthe- 
less, this film has been shown as a "public service" 
on hundreds of TV stations and in thousands of 
classrooms, service clubs, fraternal, charity, 
and civic organizations, producing a profound im- 
pact on public opinion. So convincing is the mes- 
sage that countless viewers who later contract 
cancer will not even listen to the Laetrile story — 
even though their physician has told them there no 
longer is any hope under orthodox treatment. 

As a sidelight, it is both interesting and ironic 
to note that actor Robert Ryan, star of Journey Into 
Darkness, fell victim of his own propaganda. He 
died of cancer in July of 1973 after undergoing ex- 
tensive cobalt therapy. His wife, Jessica, died of 
cancer one year previously. ^ 

While the press release, the manipulated news 
story, and the one-sided use of radio and TVconsti- 
tute some of the most frequently used weapons in 
the FDA's "arsenal of compliance," there are 
many others that are even more effective and 
deadly. Generally they are reserved for those toUgh 
customers who cannot or will not be stopped by 
mere public opinion. One of these is the destruction 
of an individual's credit rating. It is standard prac- 
tice for the FDA to write or phone Dun & Brad- 
street to advise them of one's "difficulty with the 
government." A notice to Better Business Bureau 
also is customary. 

The next escalatory step of harassment is to 
stop the publication or distribution of all printed 
matter, including books and pamphlets. The book, 


One Answer to Cancer, written by Dr. William 
Kelly, was legally blocked because it advocated 
diet father than orthodox therapy. The court ruled 
that distribution of the book would constitute a 
clear and present danger to the general public and 
that the government's duty to protect the health and 
welfare of its citizens supersedes the doctor's con- 
stitutional right of free speech. Since Dr. Kelly was 
a dentist rather than an M.D., he also was accused 
of "practicing medicine without a license." 

In fact, this is a favorite FDA ploy. Many 
health writers and lecturers have been arrested on 
just such an excuse. If a man prescribes a change in 
diet as a means of eliminating simple headache, he 
is practicing medicine without a license. If he sug- 
gests that you take vitamin C or bioflavonoids for a 
cold, he is practicing medicine without a license. If 
he recommends iron or fruit or natural roughage for 
bowel regularity, he is practicing medicine without 
a license. If he suggests that natural substances to 
be found in nature's foods can be an effective con- 
trol for cancer, he certainly is practicing medicine 
without a license. But let a major drug firm hire a 
ham actor to go on TV and proclaim to the millions 
that Bayer is good for headache, that Vicks is good 
for a cold,, that Exlax is good for regularity, or that 
orthodox medicine can cure 60% of all cancers, and 
never will one FDA eyebrow be raised. 

In order to avoid the appearance of being 
"book burners," FDA officials have claimed that 
they are censuring books, not because of the ideas 
they advocate but because the books actually are 
being used as sophisticated "labels" for products. 


They may not have any jurisdiction over ideas, but 
they do have total control over products. So, if the 
author, publisher, distributor, or seller of the book 
also should happen to have a product to sell that in 
any way is explained or promoted in the book — 
which is only logical for them to do — then the book 
and the product are seized by the FDA because of 
false or deceptive labeling. 

Denied access to the printed page, many 
nutrition-oriented writers take to the lecture hall. 
Here, too, they are stopped. They can be arrested 
either for practicing medicine without a license or 
— especially if they have a product to sell — false 

One such case was that of Mr. Bruce Butt, an 
elderly gentleman who was arrested for showing a 
pro-Laetrile film in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. Two 
and a half years later, all charges against Mr. Butt 
were dismissed in court but not until he had been 
forced to suffer gigantic legal fees, and after the 
publicity had thoroughly branded him in the public 
mind as a "health food nut," a "crackpot," and a 
"cancer quack."' 

If the object of FDA harassment is still alive 
and kicking after all of this, then there is yet one 
more weapon in the government's arsenal of com- 
pliance that surely will drop him in his tracks: Cut 
off his mail! The Post Office, after all, is just 
another branch of the same federal machinery, and 
it will honor, without question, any FDA adminis- 
trative or court ruling to the effect that a publication 
or product is "not in the public interest." On the 
basis of this glib phrase, at least six unorthodox 


health books and their advertising have been ban- 
ned from the mail. The Cardiac -Society, for exam- 
ple, had earned FDA displeasure by selling vitamin 
E as a means of raising funds to carry on its work to 
educate the public about the relationship between 
vitamin E and a healthy heart. Incoming mail to the 
organization's headquarters was intercepted by the 
Post Office and returned to the sender marked 

Charles C. Johnson, Jr. , Administrator of the 
Environmental Health Service, the agency which, 
for a while, supervised the activities of the FDA, 
has summed up very well the present attitude of 
government officials when he said: "We have a 
variety of tools in pur arsenal of compliance." 1 

The phrase "arsenal of compliance" tells us a 
great deal about the mentality of the hardened 
bureaucrat and, as we have seen, it is a perfect 
description of what the average citizen now must 
face when he challenges the government that he has 
so blandly — perhaps even approvingly — watched 
grow over the years. In the name of "protecting the 
people" — in the field of nutrition as in all other 
fields of human interest and activity — it rapidly is 
becoming the greatest single threatening force from 
which the people now need protecting. 

Harrison, The Dictocrats, op. cit., p. 50. 





An analysis of the FDA's double 

standard in which harmless 

non-drug materials such as 

organic vitamins and food 

supplements are burdened with 

restrictions and regulations in 

excess of those applied to many 

toxic and dangerous drugs; 

special consideration of FDA 

attitudes toward aspirin, apricot 

kernels, Aprikern, bitter almonds, 

fluoridated water, and marijuana. 

The FDA's unrelenting war on organic vita- 
mins, foocl supplements, and non T drug medicines is 
well known. Much of the agency's time and re- 
sources are spent each year warning the public 
about the dangers that lurk in the nutritional ap- 
proach to health. When it comes to the broad cate- 
gory of drugs, however, there is, by comparison, a 
marked lack of concern. In fact, quite to the con- 
trary, there is a gently implied admonition: " Don't 
be concerned about harm from drugs. Take what- 
ever we have approved and relax. You're in safe 



For example, in July of 1971 the FDA issued a 
"Fact Sheet" on the subject of drug side effects. 
Under the heading: "Should People Fear Drugs 
Because of Possible Side Effects?" we find this 

Drugs should be respected rather than 
. feared. A physician's decision to use a 
drug is a considered one. It is his decision 
that it is better to treat a disease with a 
certain drug than leave it untreated, and 
that there is greater danger in not using 
the drug. 1 

The comment regarding the supremacy of the 
physician's decision, of course, is to be taken with a 
rather large grain of salt. It is an excellent 
philosophy but, as any physician who has tried to 
use Laetrile or other vitamin therapy will tell you, it 
simply is not true. And now, with increasing 
government regulation of what a doctor may or may 
not prescribe forindividual patients (through such 
federal agencies as PSRO), it is evident that the 
government wants physicians to become merely 
robots who are trained to administer only. approved 
"Federal treatment number 9714-32" in response 
to "Federal group diagnosis number 7482-91 ." But 
the statement "Drugs respected rather 
than feared" is a totally honest reflection of FDA 
philosophy and, when compared to its paranoia 

'Fact Sheet CSS-D2 (FDA) 72-3001. 


over organic vitamins, it offers a convenient van- 
tage point from which to observe the operation of its 
double standard. 

Congressman Craig Hosmer, outspoken critic 
of the FDA's one-sided attack on the organic nutri- 
tion and vitamin industry, has said: 

I have been informed that there never has 
been an accidental death due to vitamin 
overdosage, but it is said one person dies 
every three.days from taking lethal doses 
of aspirin .... But, despite the fact that 
Americans buy twenty million pounds of 
aspirin a year, FDA has never publicly 
considered any kind of regulation or 
warning on labels. Instead, the agency 
has spent its time and millions of the 
taxpayer's dollars establishing arbitrary 
daily dosages for harmless vitamins and 
minerals. 1 

Congressman Hosmer has hit the bull's eye. 
The danger to public health does not lie in organic 
food supplements or vitamins sold' in health food 
stores. It lies in the vast inventories of toxic man- 
made drugs. Nothing recommended by a health 
lecturer ever produced such tragedies as 
thalidomide babies. The records show that as many 
as five percent of all hospital admissions now are 
the result of adverse' reactions to legally acquired 

Harrison, The Dictocrats, op. ciu, p. 217. 


prescription drugs. 1 It has been estimated that no 
less than one and a half million people are sent to the 
hospital each year as a result of orthodox drugs 
— which means that these legally acquired materials 
are injuring hundreds of times more people than all 
the illegally acquired psyehodelic drugs put to- 
gether. And, after a patient is admitted to the hospi- 
tal for reasons other than drug reactions, his 
chances of falling victim of drug sickness more than 
doubles. Drug sickness fn the hospital now strikes 
well over three and a half million patients each 
year. 2 

As long ago as 1960, it was acknowledged that 
at least forty new diseases or syndromes had been 
attributed to drugs used in therapy, 3 and the 
number has grown impressively since then. 

The situation with non-prescription over-the- 
counter drugs is almost as bad. Aspirin — first pro- 
duced by Bayer of I.G. Farben — is a classic exam- 
ple. Americans have been "sold" on aspirin to the 
tune of over twenty million pounds per year. That's 
approximately sixteen billion tablets, or an average 
of eighty tablets per person, each year! 

Aspirin, of, course, is a drug. It is completely 
man-made. It is widely recognized as dangerous if 
taken in excessive doses — especially for children. 
Overdoses can result not only from a single large 
ingestion but also from continuous use which pro- 

rtt Important Prescribing Information, from FDA Commissioner 
Charles C. Edwards, M.D.," U.S. Department of Health, Education 
and Welfare, 1971. 

2 Martin Gross, The Doctors, (Random House, N.Y., 1966). 
3 President Kennedy's Consumers* Protection Message of March 15, 


duces accumulative effects. Every year, there are 
at least ninety deaths in the United States from 
overdoses of aspirin. 1 

Ninety deaths each year is no small matter. 
Yet, the FDA does nothing except to require each 
aspirin label to state the recommended safe dosage 
plus the admonition: "or as recommended by your 
physician." The important point, however, is not 
that the FDA should do more, but that it applies a 
glaringly unfair double standard against natural 
food and vitamin products. In November of 1973, 
for example, it stopped the production and distribu- 
tion of a product known as Aprikern. Aprikern is 
the trade name given to apricot kernels that have 
been ground, cold pressed to remove the fatty oils, 
and encapsulated. The process retains the ni- 
triloside or vitamin B17 content, increases the po- 
tency concentration by approximately 10%, re- 
duces the caloric content, and increases the resis- 
tance to rancidity. Aprikern, therefore, had be- 
come extremely popular among those who were 
knowledgeable of the vitamin B17 story. 

Based upon obscure "studies" allegedly con- 
ducted at the University of Arizona School of 
Pharmacology, the FDA announced that Aprikern 
contained "a poison .which would kill both adults 

and children." 2 

Note that the FDA did not say that Aprikern 

actually had killed any adults or children — as aspi- 
rin does every week— but that it could do so. Note 

1 FDA Fact Sheet, July 1971, (FDA) 72-3002. 

2 "These Two Health Foods 4 Dangerous', " (UPI) News Chronicle, 
Nov. 28, 1973, p. 11. 


also that, during the court case that resulted from 
the legal action instituted by the FDA against the 
manufacturer, the scientists from the University of 
Arizona who had conducted the toxicity experi- 
ments on rats which supposedly proved that Ap- 
rikern was dangerous, testified that the results of 
their tests were inconclusive and that they would 
not stand behind the interpretation widely publi- 
cized by the FDA. 

Undaunted, the FDA continued to press its 
case stating that it was conducting tests of its own 
and that these surely would "prove" that Aprikern 
is dangerous. 1 

William Dixon, chief of Arizona's Consumer 
Protection Division which worked jointly with the 
FDA in the initial action against Aprikern, told 

We could wait six months for the FDA 
tests , but if some kid died from eating this 
stuff, I wouldn't want our office to be 
responsible. 2 

From this, may we assume that Mr. Dixon's 
office is responsible for deaths from aspirin over- 
dose? Or are we to suspect that all of this pretended 
concern for the public welfare- is just so much eye 
wash to conceal an unconscionable double stan- 
dard whereby agencies of government are being 

1 And it is possible that they will — even if they have to hit those 
helpless rats over the head with a hammer to produce the desired 
results! * 

2 "Suit Labels Health Food as Harmful," Phoenix Gazette, Nov. 28, 


used on behalf of the drug cartel to harass and 
destroy competition from the-non-drug health in- 
dustry? We may ponder what Mr. Dixon's concern 
would be if "some kid," or some adult, for that 
matter, dies from not "eating this stuff." 

Leaving no stone unturned, Arizona's Health 
Commissioner, Dr. Louis Kassuth, went so far as 
to issue a public warning that, even though Whole 
apricots would not be effected by the government 
embargo, their pits should not be cracked open and, 
above all, the kernels must not be eaten* ^ 

Ah, it is so comforting to have such wise and 
beneficent political experts watching over us and 
protecting us from our own folly. How wretched we 
would be without them. How reassuring it is to pick 
up a copy of a government publication entitled 
Requirements of the United States Food, Drug, 
and Cosmetic Act, and read: 

Because of their toxicity, bitter almonds 
may not be marketed in the United States 
for unrestricted use. Shipments of syveet 
almonds [which do not contain vitamin 
B17] may not contain more than five per- 
cent of bitter almonds. Almond paste and 
pastes made from other kernels should 
contain less than twenty-five parts per 
million of hydrocyanic acid (HCN) 
naturally occurring in the kernels. 2 

14t Apricot Pits Hitby Ban," Phoenix Gazette, Nov. 29, 1973, p. B-l. 
2 That's only one four-hundreths of one percent. FDA Publication No. 
2, June, 1970, p. 26. 


Needless to say, there is not a single over-the- 
counter drug on the market today that could pass 
toxicity restrictions even remotely as severe as 
these. The law does not protect us. It is a weapon 
against us. 

In a letter to this author dated December 26, 
1971, Dr. Ernst T. Krebs, Jr. anticipated the 
FDA's action against over two years 
when he explained: 

The full awareness of the significance of 
vitamin B17 (nitriloside) is now register- 
. ing in the minds of our bureaucrats and 
those whom they serve. The attitude is 
becoming obvious even to us that these 
people feel vitamin B17 is too good and 
too valuable for the Indians. Just as in the 
past when valuable minerals or oil were 
discovered on Indian lands, government 
bureaucracy would move the Indians 
away to "better land," so attempts are 
being made now to move all innovators 
and pioneers on vitamin B17 away from 
the development — through the invoca- 
tion of one legal ruse or another — until it 
"cools," and then allow monopoly sup- 
porting the involved bureaucracy to pre- 
empt the field .... 

Please keep in mind that the potential or 
waiting market for Aprikern is at least as 
great as that for all the other vitamins, 
including C. Today, bureaucracy can 
make or break a billion dollar market . 
within a few days with merely a few pro- 


nouncements or edicts. A Surgeon- 
General bought just like fresh beef (but 
not as intrinsically valuable), can say 
"yes" or "no" on phosphate or non- 
phosphate detergents on evening TV. He 
reads his lines as they are given to him, 
and the markets move accordingly. De- ' 
spite a few twists and turns for window 
trimming, monopoly is almost always 
sustained in this game. 

The FDA perpetually informs the public that 
"nutritional quackery" is big business with huge 
profits. But it remains strangely silent about the 
really big business and the super profits of the drug 
industry. FDA spokesmen speak with great con- 
cern about a supposed five hundred million dollars 
spent each year on vitamins and food supplements. 
Even if that figure is accurate, which is unlikely, it is 
minuscule compare to the staggering annual expen- 
diture of four billion, three hundred million dollars 
spent on prescription drugs plus another one 
billion, eight hundred million for drugs sold over the 
counter. 1 The absence of FDA "public concern" 
over this sector of its responsibility is highly reveal- 
ing. . x 

The FDA acknowledges that it has received 
reports of "excessive promotiofial activity by some 
representatives of pharmaceutical manufacturers" 
-^ meaning that not all "detail men" from the drug' 
firms are totally honest in the description of their 
company's product. Nevertheless, it completely 

^ross, The Doctors, op. cit. 


ignores this area of inquiry and devotes a major 
portion of its resources and manpower to wiretap- 
ping, bugging, and following health lecturers in an 
attenjpt to catch them making a claim that, even 
though it may be true, comes into conflict with an 
FDA ruling. At a time when the FDA is pleading 
inadequacy of tax funds to properly enforce sanita- 
tion standards within the processed food industry, 
or safety standards within the drug industry, it 
boasts about expanding its operations against such 
public enemies as the purveyors of wheat germ, 
rose hips, honey, and apricot kernels. 

Another example of the FDA's double stan- 
dard is its attitude toward sodium fluoride, the sub- 
stance that is- added to the water supplies of over 
four thousand communities in the United States on 
the supposition that fluoridated water somehow 
helps to reduce cavities. It is interesting to note, 
however, that the original 1939 studies by Dr. H. 
Trendley Dean that led to this speculation, 
specifically warned that those communities with 
low rates of tooth decay had in their natural drink- 
ing water, not only unusually high levels of fluoride, 
but also much more calcium as well. The report 
then stated that: ". . . . the possibility that the 
composition of the water in other respects [than 
fluoride] may also be a factor should not be 
overlooked." 1 

It was overlooked, however, and remains so 
today. In truth, there is little hard evidence that 

1 Dean, " Domestic Health and Dental Caries," Public HealthReport, 
May, 1939, 54:862-888. 


fluorides actually do what is claimed for them, and 
much evidence to the contrary. In fact, during the 
original investigation by Dr. Dean, he reported 
that, in 1938, in Pueblo, Colorado, thirty-seven 
percent of the people were caries-free with 0.6 parts 
per million of fluoride in the water. Yet, in East 
Moline, Illinois, with a whopping 1.5 ppm of 
fluoride — almost three times as much — only ele- 
ven percent of the population were found without 
caries. We note, also, that the city of Washington, 
D.C., which has had a fluoridated water supply for 
twenty years, now has the highest dentist-to- 
population ratio in the entire nation. Instead of 
having fewer cavities than citizens of 
non-fluoridated communities, Washingtonians 
have almost a third more! 1 

But that is not really the important point. Even 
if sodium fluoride did reduce cavities as its promot- 
ers claim, the fact is that this chemical is extremely 
toxic even in small quantities. So much §o, in fact, 
that drug companies are required to warn consum- 
ers that the presence in pills of as little as one 
milligram of this substance can cause illness in 
some persons. 

Extensive studies in Antigo, Wisconsin, 
Grand Rapids, Michigan, and Newbuxgh, New 
York, all showed that within months of adopting 
fluoridation of the water supply, thedeath rate from 
heart disease in these cities nearly doubled and 
leveled out at almost twice the national average. 
Likewise, in the Philadelphia Zoo there was a sharp 

Harrison, The Dictocrats, op. cit., pp. 229, 230. 


increase in animal and bird deaths that coincided 
with the introduction of fluoridated water. 1 

Dr. Paul H. Phillips, a University of Chicago 
biochemist who has spent twenty-nine years in re- 
search on fluoride toxicity, has pointed out that 
sodium fluoride, even when taken in extremely mi- 
nute quantities, accumulates and builds up in the 
skeletal parts of the body. Symptoms of chronic 
fluoride poisoning may not appear for many years, 
and when they do, they can be very hard to diag- 
nose. They can manifest themselves in many forms 
such as vascular calcification, disorders of the kid- 
neys, bowels, skin, stomach, thyroid, and nervous 
system, and may be responsible for headaches, 
vomiting, mongolism, mouth ulcers, pains in the 
joints, and loss of appetite. 

Dr. Simon A. Beisler, chief of Urology at New 
York's Roosevelt Hospital, has said: 

I just don't feel this thing has been re- 
searched the way it should have been. 
Fluoride in water can reach every organ 
in the body and there are indications that 
it can be harmful over a long period of 
time. 2 

Aluminum companies, as a result of their man- 
ufacturing process, give off tremendous quantities 
of fluoride compounds as waste products. Much of 
this goes into the air and eventually finds its way 

^ee news release dated August 1972 and "Is Fluorine Pollution 
Damaging Hearts," by K.A. Baird, M.D., (Citizen Action Program, 
608 Gowan Rd., Antigo, Wise, 54409). 
2 Garrison, op. cit., pp. 228-230. 


back to earth where it becomes noxious to both man 
and animal. Breathing the fumes is bad enough but 
once it is absorbed into edible plants, it is converted 
into such organic compounds as fluoracetate or 
fluorcitrate which are at least five hundred times 
more poisonous than the inorganic salt. This means 
that vegetables and fruits which have been irrigated 
by fluoridated water supplies could become poten- 
tial killers. 1 

As would be expected, aluminum companies 
habitually are the objects of successful damage 
suits. In 1946 a plant in Troutdale, Oregon, was 
sued by a local citizen who proved that the health of 
his family had been damaged by fluoride fumes. In 
1950 a Washington plant was ordered by a Tacoma 
court to pay damages- to a rancher whose cattle had 
been poisoned by eating fltioride contaminated 
grass. In June, 1958, Blount County, Tennessee 
farmers were awarded indemnity for fluoride dam- 
age to cattle and crops. 2 

Europe also has had its fluoride problems. The 
' ' death fogs", of 1 930 were finally attributed to acute 
fluoride intoxication. In a similar 1940 disaster in 
Donora, Pennsylvania, fluoride concentrations in 
the blood df victims were found to be twelve to 
twenty-five times higher than in the blood of unaf- 
fected persons. 3 

! K.A. Baird, M.D., op. cit., p. 4. 

2 "Industry's Fluoride Problem," by Lee Hardy, National Health 

Federation Bulletin, Oct. 1973, p. 20. 

3 See K. Roholm, "The Fog Disaster in the Me use Valley, 1930," 
Journal of Industrial Hygiene Toxicology, 1937, 19:126-136. Also 
Philip Stadtler, "Fluorine Gasesjn Atmosphere Blamed for Death," 
Chemical and Engineering News, 1948, 26:3962. 


The November 13, 1972, issue of theJournalof 
the American Medical Association published the 
results of a Mayo Clinic investigation into two 
cases of fluoride poisoning that occurred after 
drinking water that was fluoridated to the extent of 
2.6 parts per million in one case and only 1 .7 ppm in 
the other. These concentrations are highly 
significant because many artificially fluoridated 
water supplies are maintained atone ppm! One can 
only- wonder- how many cases of mild fluoride 
poisoning go unreported or are attributed to some 
other cause. 

tw \^e're riot exactly sure what the problem is," 
says the doctor, "but it's probably some kind of 
viral infection. Take these pills four times a day for 
a week and, if they don't do the job, we'll try some- 
thing else. Tricky things, those viruses." 

It is interesting to note that, while one com- 
munity after another in the United States rushes to 
fluoridate its water supply, many European coun- 
tries are moving in the opposite direction. West 
Germany banned fluoridation on January 4, 1971 . 
Sweden did so on November 18, 1971. And the 
highest court of the Netherlands declared 
fluoridation illegal on June 22, 1973. As the Na- 
tional Health Federation asked pointedly: "Do 
these countries know something we don't or refuse 
to accept?" 1 

If fluorides were not used in water supplies of 
the nation, they probably would be discarded as a 
waste byproduct with little other commercial use 

X NHF Anti-fluoride Petition, March, 1974. 


except in aerosol sprays, drugs, rat poison, and 
certain brands of toothpaste. It is significant, there- 
fore, that while the FDA has waged relentless war 
against harmless vitamins, apricot kernels, and 
Laetrile, it has endorsed the wide-spread and 
compulsory consumption of sodium fluoride in 
every glass of water we drink. 

As noted in a previous chapter, the FDA has 
steadfastly refused to allow even the testing of 
Laetrile because of so-called "deficiencies" in the 
mountains of paperwork required for IND (Inves- 
tigation of New Drug). It has stated that Laetrile's 
safety has not been sufficiently established to war- 
rant its use on human beings. Aside from the fact 
that Laetrile's safety record is wW/-documented, 
and that all the currently FDA approved drugs are 
notoriously wnsafe, this action is even more un- 
palatable when compared to the favorable treat- 
ment given to new drugs marketed by some of the 
large drug companies. In 1970, for example, the 
Searle Pharmaceutical Company received FDA 
approval to market an estrogen oral contraceptive 
within just one week after application. Testimony 
before the House Subcommittee on Intergovern- 
mental Relations, however, revealed that the data 
submitted was British (it is normal FDA policy to 
insist on American data), and that the British data 
itself clearly stated that it concerned effectiveness, 
only, not safety. 

When Congressman Fountain asked FDA 
Commissioner Dr. Charles C. Edwards what was 
the primary reason behind his agency's favorable 
handling of Searle' s application, he replied that it 


was "public safety." When asked to explain how 
public safety was involved in this decision, Ed- 
wards blurted out that it is "not our policy to 
jeopardize the financial interests of the pharmaceu- 
tical companies." 1 

Sere is anotHer drug that has received FDA 
favorable treatment. First marketed in 1966 by Uni- 
med, Inc., it was offered to the public for use in 
treating Meniere's Syndrome, a complication of the 
inner ear leading to dizziness and loss of balance. 
To make a long story short, there was substantial 
evidence that Sere actually made the symptoms of 
Meniere's Syndrome worse in many patients. In 
spite of repeated complaints from the medical pro- 
fession and even from Congress, the FDA refused 
to require Unimed to cease marketing the drug — 
even though it officially admitted that the data sub- 
mitted on behalf of Sere was "defective," "inade- 
quate," and contained "untrue statements of ma- 
terial facts." Acknowledging that further studies 
were needed, the FDA defended its decision to 
allow Sere on the. market by saying: "The studies 
could not be financed unless marketing of the drug 
was permitted to continue." 2 In other words, Un- 
imed was given permission to continue to sell a drug 
already found to be ineffective while consumers 
were put in the position of financing the research 
that, hopefully, would prove that it had some value 
after all. What a contrast to the FDA's unyielding 

'"Who Blocks Testing of Anti-Cancer Agent? 1 'Alameda Times Star 
(Calif.), Aug. 3,J970. 

^Consumers Reports, March, 1973, pp. 155-156. 


opposition to Laetrile and the nutritional products 
of nature. 

As Senator William Proxmire phrased it: 

The FDA and much, but not all, of the 
orthodox medical profession are actively 
hostile against the manufacture, sale and 
distribution of vitamins and minerals as 
- food or food supplements. They are out 
to get the health food industry and to 
drive the health food stores out of busi- 
ness. And they are trying to do this out o£ 
active hostility and prejudice. 1 

The subject of psychedelic drugs constitutes 
perhaps the final madness in the FDA's insane 
asylum of double standards. Omar Garrison recalls 
the story: 

Americans reacted with a sense of shock, 
followed by nationwide cries of indigna- 
tion, when FDA Commissioner James L. 
Goddard told an audience of university 
students that he would not object to his 
daughter smoking marijuana any more 
than if she drank a cocktail .... 

Even the normally permissive Time 
magazine clucked with mild disapproval, 
noting that Goddard' s opinion "was par- 
ticularly surprising because the FDA di- 

*As quoted in National Health Federation Bulletin, April 1974, cover. 


rector has been so strict in demanding 
that drug companies show clear proof on 
the efficacy and safety of their products 
before he allows them on the market. 
There is still almost no research, how- 
ever, into what marijuana does — and 
does not do — to the human mind and 
body, and no scientific evidence that 
proves or disproves that it is better or 
worse than alcohol. 1 

A short time prior to this, Dr. Goddard had 
expressed great concern over the extent to which 
Americans were, consuming unneeded vitamin 
pills, and called for tighter restrictions on the formu- 
lation and sale of these harmless commodities. He 
had supported FDA rulings and penalties calling 
for up to thirty years in prison for those who advo- 
cate the use of harmless herbs and food supple- 
ments for the alleviation of metabolic disease. Now 
he had given his blessings to cannabis sativa which, 
regardless of all else that might be said about it, is 
° far from harmless. 

For instance, on May 20, 1974, Dr. Hardin B. 
Jones, professor of medical physics and physiology 
at the University of California and Assistant Direc- 
tor of the University Donner Laboratories in Berke- 
ley, appeared before the Senate Internal Security 
Subcommittee and testified: 

As an expert in human radiation effects [it 
is my observation thl$t damage] . . . even 
in those who use cannabis "moderately" 

l Ibid., pp. 175, 176. 


is roughly the same type and degree of 
damage as in persons surviving atom 
bombing with a heavy level of radiation 
exposure, approximately 150 roentgens. 

The implications are the same 

Reports of the Department of Health, 
Education and Welfare are inadequate 
scientifically, do not touch accurately on 
the principal matters needing clarifica- 
tion, and, in many instances, are likely to 
lead the public to believe that science has 
proven marijuana harmless. 1 

This, then, is the double standard of the FDA. 
We can buy aspirin and a hundred other drugs of 
questionable safety by the barrelful. We can buy 
alcoholic beverages by the case and tobacco pro- 
ducts by the carload. In over four thousand 
communities we are forced to drink sodium 
fluoride. Yet, at the same time, the FDA literally 
has been burying organic food supplements and 
vitamins under a mountain of red tape, restrictions, 
and harassment. 

When a woman takes the life of her unborn . 
child on the theory that she may do what she wishes 
with her own body, she receives the sanction of the 
Federal Supreme Court. But if she purchases Lae- 
trile in an attempt to save a life — either her child's 
or her own — she has participated in a criminal act. 

This double standard is an outrageous insult to 
the intelligence of the American people. 

HAP) "Marijuana Smoking Poisonous, M.D. Says," Boston Herald 
American, May 21, 1974, pg. 2. 



The means by which doctors are 

intimidated against the use of 

Laetrile; the Sloan-Kettering 

investigation of Laetrile as a case 

history of capitulation; and the 

courageous stand of Dr. John 

Richardson against the FDA. 

Undoubtedly the FDA would be pleased if it 
could prevent all public utterances in favor of drug- 
less medicine or organic nutrition but, because of 
constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech to 
which it still must at least pay lip service, it has had 
to settle, for the time being, for allowing people to 
talk all they want, so long as they cannot distribute 
the vitamin of food materials about which they 
speak. People may advocate vitamin B17 from the 
rooftop, but if the consumer cannot actually put his 
hands on apricot kernels, Aprikern, Laetrile, or 
some other product containing this substance, then 
no real harm is done to the status quo. 
Consequently, the FDA has devoted a major part 
of its enforcement energies to the task of harassing 
or destroying those who produce, distribute, or ac- 



tually administer vitamin B 17 for the prevention or 
the control of cancer. 

Doctors are particularly singled out for strong 
action for the obvious reason that, if too many of 
them were allowed to use vitamin therapy without 
being chastised by professional and public agen- 
cies, other doctors might be tempted to explore for 
themselves, and it could well result in opening the 
floodgates of medical acceptance in spite of FDA 
and AMA pronouncements and decrees. Each doc- 
tpr that dares to resist, therefore, must be brutally 
and publically destroyed as a gruesome example, 
seen and understood by all other doctors, as what 
they, too, can expect if they should be foolish 
enough to follow suit. 

This point was made abundantly clear during 
the trial of Mr. Harvey Howard of Sylmar, Califor- 
nia, who was prosecuted for selling Laetrile tablets 
to cancer victims. One of the witnesses for the state 
was Dr. Ralph Weilerstein of the California De- 
partment of Public Health. During cross- 
examination, Dr. Weilerstein was asked if he knew 
of any "reputable" doctors who prescribed Lae- 
trile. Weilerstein answered: "So far as I know, any 
doctor who has prescribed Laetrile in California 
since 1963 has been successfully- prosecuted?' 1 

So there we. have it. Every* doctor who has 
prescribed Laetrile has been prosecuted. Any doc- 
tor who is prosecuted cannot be "reputable." 
Therefore, no "reputable" doctor ever has pre- 
scribed Laetrile! 

144 Sylmar Man Faces Trial on Cancer Quack Count,** LA. Times, 
Van Nuys section, Sept. 15, 1972. 


The dilemma facing a doctor, then, is this. 
Shall he follow hi^Hippocratic oath and his sense of 
moral obligatioff to do that which he honestly be- 
lieves is best for his patient, or shall he abide by the 
bureaucratic rules laid down by politican-doctors 
on behalf of vested commercial and political in- 
terest? Human nature being what it is, some will 
follow the higher law. Many will not. 

Dr. Ernst T. Krebs, Jr., himself a veteran of 
repeated legal battles with the FDA, in a letter 
dated March 9, 1971, warned physician John 
Richardson, M.D., what would be in store for him 
if he publicly became identified with Laetrile. 
Commenting upon a proposed magazine article 
about Laetrile to be written by Dr. Richards6n, Dr. 
Krebs said: 

It is only fair to emphasize, however, that 
once a physician has embarked upon such 
a path -he is given no way to escape his 
printed words. These can have a devas- 
tatingly destructive effect upon his pro- 
fessional status, upon his wife and family , 
even upon his personal safety. 

At a lecture at Sheraton-West in Los 
Angeles last Thursday, a sincere and ob- 
viously intense woman (whom I had pre- 
viously met) arose during the question 
and answer period. "I was a physician in 
the U.S.S.R., but I left for what I be- 
, lieved was a free country. But now I am 
told by the County [Medical] Society 


that, if I dare use Laetrile, they will get 
me and my license. I want to follow your 
work. What should I do?" 

I replied, "You have a great responsibil- 
ity as a doctor in a society in which there 
is a great shortage of physicians. Forget 
Laetrile and do your very best where you 
are, and in doing this you may be much 
more effective than joining a battle for 
which you possibly are not prepared. 
Trained in dialectical materialism as you 
were, you may smile at this. It is possible 
that the Lord has not touched your shoul- 
der for service on this front. I know only 
that He has touched mine." 

The reference to the possibility of danger to 
Dr. Richardson's personal safety was not made 
lightly or without justification. Elsewhere in this 
same letter Dr. Krebs explained: 

As my secretary will tell you, since she 
was with me, five hours after presenting a 
rather effective lecture on cancer before 
an audience of about four hundred in Los t 
Angeles, the windshield was shot out 
my car on the road back to San Fran- 
cisco. The next night the glass window in 
the tail gate was shot out (three hundred 
miles removed from the first/shooting). 
The police said, "Maybe sonleone is try- 
ing to tell you something." 


We do not want to dwell on the matter of 
physical violence, but the late Arthur T. 
Harris, M.D.; was threatened by two 
men with assassination if he continued to 
use Laetrile. Since that time we have de- 
centralized the work so that, if any two of 
us are shot out of the saddle, it will have 
only a slightly negative effect on the pro- 

It takes a certain type of man to stand up 
against pressures and threats of this kind. There are 
many who talk a good line about courage and stand- 
ing on principle, but, when the chips are down and 
the Establishment begins to play dirty, there are 
relatively few who will persevere. 

Dr. Krebs is one of those men. Even as a 
student doing post-graduate work at the university, 
he had been a strong advocate of the trophoblastic 
thesis of cancer and had become conspicuous for 
his experimental work with vitamin Bit. In a letter 
to the author dated September 23, 1973, Dr. Krebs 
described the pressures that were brought to bear 
on him as a result: 

I was assured by my academic mentors 
that if I refused to obey, conform, and be 
controlled — be a member of the Club — 
I would pass into oblivion. I would be 
denied academic recognition, degrees, 
jobs, institutions, etc. My answer in the 
vernacular was for them to stuff the entire 
business because we still had enough 


freedom in this country for me togo out to 
establish my own research foundation — 
The John Beard Memorial Fouadation — 
under the despised doctrine of free enter- 

There is no better illustration of the effective- 
ness of such intimidation on the profession at large 
than what transpired in 1973 at the Sloan- Kettering 
Institute for Cancer Research. On November first, 
at an international cancer conference held in 
Badfen-Baden, Germany, representatives of 
Sloan- Kettering formally announced the results of 
their first series of tests with Laetrile. Although 
those tests had been made only on laboratory mice, 
the results were so encouraging that plans already 
had been formulated for testing on humans.. The 
first step in these plans was, in the words of the 
researchers themselves, an "assessment of the 
tremendous use of Amygdalin-Laetrile in Ger- 
many, Italy, Mexico, and other countries." 

The experiments on mice were conducted by 
Dr. Kanematsu Sigiura over a nine month period 
beginning on September 12, 1972. The summary of 
his findings was issued on June 13, 1973, and stated: 

The results clearly show that Amygdalin 
significantly inhibits the appearance of 
lung metastasis in mice bearing spon- 
taneous mammary tumors and increases 
significantly the inhibition of the growth 
of the primary tumors .... Laetrile also 
seemed to prevent slightly the appear- 


ance of new tumors .... The improve- 
ment of health and appearanpe of the 
treated animals in comparison to controls 
is always a common observation. . . . 
Some preliminary data about Swiss 
Webster mice is shown in Table II. A 
total of five mice were used. As seen, 
three of these mice which had small 
mammary tumors and were treated as 
9 usual with amygdalin showed tumor re- 
gression and, in two of these, tumors 
could no longer be detected. . • . Dr. 
Sugiura has never observed complete re- 
gression of these tumors in all his cosmic 
experience with other chemotherapeutic 
agents. 1 

The reader is advised to go back and read that 
last section again for, as we shall see, just a few 
months later, spokesmen for Sloan Kettering were 
flatly denying that there was any evidence what- 
soever that Laetrile had any value. 

About a month prior to the public announce- 
ment at Baden-Baden of Dr. Sugiura' s "cosmic" 
findings, this author wrote a short article entitled 
"A Scenario — Just for the Record." Published in 
October of 1973, it said: 

Sloan- Kettering is, of course, the 
epitome of the orthodox Medical Estab- 
lishment. With untold millions of dollars v_ 

144 A Summary of the Effect of Amygdalin Upon Spontaneous Mam- 
mary Tumors in Mice," Sloan- Kettering report, June 13, 1973. 


channelled through its facilities in the 
"War on Cancer," it would be embarras- 
sing, to say the least, merely to end up 
serving the function of confirming what a 
handful of independent researchers, 
without a penny of tax money to support 
them, have been saying for over twenty 
years. A triumph by free enterprise of 
such magnitude simply must not be 
acknowledged by the Establishment 
which is so deeply committed to govern- 
ment subsidies, government programs, 
and government control. 

Consequently, it is predictable that most 
of those in science and medicine who now 
are dependent on government directly or 
. indirectly for support — and that includes 
Sloan- Kettering — now will struggle to 
find ways to (1) get on board the Laetrile 
train; (2) do so in such a way as -to save 
face in spite of their incredible past error, 
and (3) prevent those who have pioneered 
Laetrile from receiving the primary 

While it always is dangerous to speculate 
about the future in precise terms, 
nevertheless, it seems probable that the 
Establishment scenario will be as fol- 

creasingly, the name Laetrile will be re- , 


placed by Amygdalin. Great attention 
will be given to the different kinds and 
sources of this substance. 1 

The final product may even be combined 
with another substance which, sup- 
posedly, will increase the beneficial effect 
of the Amygdalin. The name of the final 
substance will not be Laetrile. 

TURE. In order to vindicate the 
scientific expense, the final product must 
appear to be a man-made substance. If 
any recognition at all is given to the 
natural mechanisms, it will be only in 
passing to the really "important" reac- 
tions effected by the man-made concoc- 
tion. We will be told that it was nature 
that gave us cancer in the first place, and 
that man, as a result of his infinite intellect 
and industry, has in fact improved upon 
- nature. Those who developed and 
pioneered Laetrile will be mentioned only 
as early researchers who had stumbled 
across a small part of the total answer. 


Perhaps the most important objective of 

*It should be noted that, in a strictly scientific sense, there are minor 
differences in the molecular arrangements of Laetrile and amygdalin 
compounds. Nevertheless, the word Laetrile is properly used to de- 
note those special compounds that have been developed for cancer 
therapy, and not to refer to them as such is to cloud the basic issue in the 
public mind. 


Establishment Medicine is to preserve or 
bolster the sagging image pf government. 
Government direction^ control, and ulti- 
mately government monopoly in the field 
of medicine must be sold to the American 
people at all costs. Consequently, we 
most likely, will be told over arid over 
again how a cure for cancer — that most 
dread disease — has, at last, been found 
as a result of the federal government's 
"War on Cancer." We will be told that 
the task was much too large to be under- 
taken by private research; that only 
government could have done it, not in the 
name of profit, but in the name of all man- 
kind. In fact, it may develop that the cred- 
it will be given to an international effort 
carried on jointly between several 
governments (most likely the United 
States and the Soviet Union acting 
through the World Health Organization 
of the U.N.) and, thus, be used as a 
means of generating increased public 
support of, not just government, but 
international government, as well. 

PROFIT. It long has been the policy of 
large world-wide industries to operate in 
such a way as to reduce competition be- 
tween them so as to realize the greatest 
possible level of profits . . . .The chemi- 
cal and pharmaceutical industries are 
well-known to have been consistent par- 


ticipants in restraint-of-trade and cartel 

After describing the Standard Oil agreement 
with I.G. Farben on the hydrogenation process 
referred to in a previous chapter, the article con- 

As it was with the hydrogenation pro- 
cess, so it is with Laetrile. For two de- 
cades Laetrile has been viewed as com- 
petition which must be eliminated. But 
now that it is obvious it cannot be elimi- 
nated, the move is to "obtain therefrom 
such benefits as we c^n, and assure the 
t distribution of the products in question 
through our existing marketing 

We can look forward to the prospects of 
having Laetrile mass-produced either 
under the name Amygdalin or in conjunc- 
tion with some man-made compound 
under an entirely different name, and 
then distributed through existing chan- 
nels of prescription drugs. There will be 
little or no price competition in such dis- 
tribution and, although the actual price 
will not seem unreasonable considering 
the benefits derived, there will be an 
overly ample profit margin to the man- 
ufacturers. Above all, however, it will 


not be regarded as a nutritional factor or 
as a vitamin, and, thus, the general pres- . 
tige and sales market for drugs will not 
be endangered. The present drive of Es- 
tablishment Medicine against vitamins 
consequently can continue without hin- 

All of this is part of the anticipated 
scenario which begins with the tests of 
Sloan- Kettering. Will it turn out this 
way? Of course, only time will tell. 
Perhaps even this prediction, if read by 
enough people, could set into motion a 
series of events that would cause it not to • 
come to pass. As a matter of fact, that is 
the very reason the prediction is being 
made. It is axiomatic that deception can- 
not be successful if the person to be de- 
ceived is warned in advance. By making it 
clear beforehand what is expected, it is 
this author's hope either to thwart the 
deceivers altogether, or at least to force 
them to seek an alternate course which 
either will be less harmful or more 
obvious. 1 

Little was it realized when these words were 
published just how prophetically accurate they 
would become. Many of the predictions, of course, 
still remain to be tested by future events, but none 
of them have yet been proven wrong, and the gen- 

^ommittee for Freedom of Choice newsletter, Oct. 1973. 


eral theme underlying the specifics has been borne 
out in a most dramatic way. 

This author was informed by a reliable source 
close to Sloan- Kettering that the publication of "A 
Scenario" had caused a great deal of concern 
among the top officials there. It had complicated 
their task which was already difficult in view of 
strong pressures "from above" to drop the entire 
Laetrile investigation. It was suggested that a 
"softer" approach would make it easier for estab- 
lished researchers to "move? in our direction," and 
that a continuation of the "hard line" could only 
delay the ultimate acceptance of Laetrile. It w^s 
suggested that Dr. Lloyd Old, in charge of the 
research project at Sloan- Kettering, really was 
firmly convinced -of the trophoblastic thesis and 
was most anxious to help, but that all this hard-line 
talk about vested interests, cartels, and political 
corruption was making his superiors — and their 
superiors — increasingly touchy about the whole 
matter. « 

The Sloan- Kettering episode was merely 
another confirmation of the fact that there are rela- 
tively few within the medical profession who are 
able to stand up against the crushing pressures for 
conformity. Returning again to Dr. Kreb's letter of 
counsel to Dr. Richardson, Krebs wrote: 

Cancer is where the action is. The inno- 
cents who touch Laetrile experience a 
traumatic syndrome unparalleled in 
American life. This is why we so strongly 
counsel many fine and dedicated doctors 
to refrain. Of course, every society 


always has a few who cannot live fully 
without walking the highest wire in the 

Dr. Richardson appreciated this caution 
from his friend who had already walked the wire, 
but he had been to the top of the tent himself and 
there was no turning back once he had become 
convinced through his own clinical experience that 
nutritional therapy actually worked. 

John Richardson was no stranger to unpopular 
causes. As a long-time member of The John Birch 
Society, he already had sampled the bitter taste of 
attacks in the Establishment press and the predict- 
able public scorn that always is generated by such 
attacks. He knew that, while most people usually 
will agree that ' ' you can't believe a thing you read in 
the papers," nevertheless, they do believe without 
question almost everything that is printed. Also, 
the Birch Society long had been trying to tell the 
American people that there was little difference 
between Communism, Fascism, Nazism, 
Socialism, New Dealism, or any other kind of 
"ism" that is based upon the concept of big 
government. It had advanced the argument that the 
only solution to most of the world's problems today 
lay in the reduction of the size and power of 
government: In so doing, it had taken aim at the 
very mainspring of the cartel's mechanism for profit 
and power. If this mainspring of big government 
were to be disabled, the machinery of every petty 
dictator and despot also would be brought to a halt. 
Individuals or organizations may be allowed to op- 


pose lesser parts of the mechanism such as "Com- 
munist subversion," or ''corruption in public 
office , " or " tax loopholes , " or even ' ' deficit spend- 
ing." But let an organization draw a bead on the 
prime mover behind all of these manifestations — 
the concept of big government itself — and it will 
know the wrath of the cartel finpols, the Com- 
munists, the neo-Nazis, the petty bureaucrats, and 
all other would-be dictators of the American Re- 
public. Each of these may fight the other for relative 
rank and wealth within what they believe will be a 
world government of unlimited power, but they all 
close ranks against the common enemy who has the 
audacity to advocate — and to work for — a reduc- 
tion in the size and power of government. 

If true, this was an incredible admission. Here 
was a group of professional researchers charged 
with the grave responsibility of finding a means to 
stop the annual cancer slaughter. The lives of mil- 
lions literally hang on the outcome of their work. 
Yet, they were saying that bad public relations or 
the loss of prestige in the public mind could well 
force them to abandon or bury a research project 
which, by their own admission, was extremely 

Researchers — even those on the staffs of such 
prestigious institutions as Sloan- Kettering — must 
eat. Once they break the discipline of the Estab- 
lishment, there are few places that will hire them. 
So they follow orders and keep quiet. 

Three months later, on January 10, 1973, Dr. 
Robert Good, the president of Sloan- Kettering, 
announced flatly that the extensive evidence 


produced by its previous tests now simply did not 
exist and even went so far as to describe his own 
organization's formal presentation at Baden-Baden 
and its official statements given to the press at that 
time as a "pre mature leak" of information. Dr. 
Good said: 

At this moment there is no evidence that 
Laetrile has any effect on cancer ... .A 
premature leaklastfall of test information 
from the laboratory had given thousands 
of cancer victims false hope that Laetrile 
might work. 1 

As stated in -'The Scenario:" 

By making it clear beforehand, what is 
expected, it is this author's hope either to 
thwart the deceivers altogether, or at 
least to force them to seek an alternate 
course which either will be less harmful 
or more obvious. 

It is the considered opinion of many that for 
Sloan- Kettering to reject the project completely is 
both less harmful and more obvious than for it to 
proceed along the lines of the scenario for, in this 
way, the road is still open ahead to a real solution to 
cancer without the further concentration of 
economic and political power. 

At the time of this writing sources inside Sloan 
Kettering have said that a third round of clinical 
trials with Laetrile has been just as promising — if 

, "NewsinBrief;TheNation,"L./^r/mes,Jan. 10, 1974, Part I, p. 2. 


not more so — than the first. We are told that those 
in charge of the project are hesitant to discuss the 
matter publicly until the entire series of tests is 
complete, and that they are hoping to announce the 
effectiveness of Laetrile just as soon as they have 
enough data to satisfy all the skeptics. This, of 
course, sounds like a reasonable course of action, 
but we will not hold our breath waiting — especially 
since those tests could well be stretched out over 
many months or even years. Let us hope that those 
inside Sloan Kettering will be successful in resisting 
the pressures from above, but we must be pardoned 
for postponing our celebrations until completion of 
the deed. 

There are those who feel that, aside from the 
question of profits and power, it makes little differ- 
ence who receives the credit for solving the cancer 
problem as long as it is solved and people are no 
longer dying. But it does make a difference. It 
makes a big difference if the people, organizations, 
and philosophies given the credit are, in truth, the 
very ones that were responsible for its hindrance. It 
does make a difference if those who earn the honor- 
ary degrees and medical prizes are the ones who, by 
their ignorance, arrogance, or subservience, held 
back the truth for over two decades. And it makes a 
substantial difference if those who claim the 
privilege of political leadership do so as the result of 
policies which have caused so much suffering and 
death among their fellow citizens that it can be 
classified only as mass-murder. The difference it 
makes, in other words, i&that the future must not be 
entrusted to those who have % betrayed the past. 


Consequently, Dr. Richardson not only was 
used to the scorn of many of his fellow citizens who 
slavishly but unwittingly follow the lead of the opin- 
ion molders in the mass press, but he also was 
sufficiently informed about the dual nature of 
monopoly and totalitarian government to readily 
understand the true nature of the broad forces ar- 
rayed against him. While others in the Laetrile 
movement tried to "enlighten" the FDA to its error 
in hopes that it would change its position, he knew 
that they totally were wasting their time. While 
others circulated petitions requesting the FDA to 
grant permission for the further testing of Laetrile, 
he said: "Get the FDA out of it altogether." While 
others were stunned at the blatantly unfair treat- 
ment given to them by the TV directors of NBC, he 
was surprised only that it wasn't worse. And while 
others instruct their attorneys to find some legal 
technicality to avoid a full confrontation with the 
law, Dr. Richardson has sought ways to test the 
constitutionality of the law itself and is determined 
to take the issue, not only to the Supreme Court of 
the federal government but to the ultimate Supreme 
Court of the land — The Court of Public Opinion. 

Dr. Richardson was arrested on June 2, 1972, 
for violating the California FDA's "anti- 
quackery" law — which means that he was charged 
with using Laetrile in the treatment of cancer. 
Armed officials burst into his office and, in the 
presence of patients (as well as news photographers 
whom the FDA had tipped off to cover the arrest), 
they handcuffed him and his two nurses and hauled 
them off to jail like dangerous criminals. The office 


was ransacked and every bit of Dr. Richardson's 
personal files and correspondence was seized. Pa- 
tients desperately in need of medical treatment 
were sent home. One child with advanced cancer of 
the leg died shortly afterward. And it is not impos- 
sible that the death could have been prevented if it 
had not been for the delays and the psychological 
trauma resulting from the arrest. 

Dr. Richardson's legal battle for medical free- 
dom was long and costly. In May of 1974, after two 
years of litigation and two trials — both of which 
resulted in hung juries — the judge advised the food 
and drug authorities that they had failed to prove 
their case and that, consequently, all charges 
against Dr. Richardson were being dismissed. 

The excellent point made during the trials by 
defense attorney George Kell was that vitamin B17 
was used by Dr. Richardson, not for the treatment 
of the lump or bump that orthodox medicine calls 
cancer, but for a general metabolic deficiency con- 
dition which causes the lump or bump. The tumors 
are the symptom of the disease, not the disease 

This is an important scientific and legal point, 
but it is much too narrow to be of major significance" 
to the overall problem. It may be that, as a result of 
this case, American doctors will be able to use 
Laetrile if they drop the word cancer from their 
vocabulary, but it is anticipated that the FDA will 
not let it rest there. It is both possible and likely that 
new administrative rulings or definitions will be 
forthcoming to close the door on medical freedom 
once again. 


It is obvious, therefore, that, regardless of the 
success of this particular case, the major battles are 
yet to come. There must be many similar court and 
legislative victories before the ultimate constitu- 
tional goal is achieved. And if these battles are to be 
fought, they must be led by men such as Ernst 
Krebs and John Richardson — men who do not 
shirk from the danger or the controversy. Let us 
hope that there will be many like them who a,re not 
afraid to step forward and to walk the highest wire. 



Conclusions regarding the 

specific motives that have led 

various groups into opposition to 

vitamin therapy; particular 

perspective given to the role 

played by desire for world 

government; a review of the 

"limited" vs. "total" conspiracy 

theories; and an appraisal of 

grass-roots backlash as a force 

for potential change. 

"Who are they, John?, Why would anyone 
want to hold back a cure for cancer?" 

It was skepticism and curiosity behind this 
question addressed to Dr, John Richardson that led 
this author into what turned out to be a two-and-a- 
half year research and writing project. This lengthy 
tome is the result of that effort, and well over half of 
its pages.have been devoted to an attempt to answer 
that key question of motives. It is time, now, to 
draw this information together into specific conclu- 

First of all, as emphasized many times during 
the course of this study, the overwhelming majority 



of those in the medical, pharmaceutical, research, 
and fund-raising industries are deeply conscien- 
tious individuals dedicated to their work. It is their 
firm conviction that what they are doing, as chan- 
neled within the confines of "the system," is in the 
best interest of mankind. This is particularly true of 
the typical physician who has received little training 
in organic nutrition, has never heard of the tropho- 
blastic thesis of cancer, never has had a chance to 
use Laetrile, never has read a favorable review of 
vitamin therapy in accepted medical journals, and 
never has had any reason to question the reliability 
of the foundation and tax-supported "experts" who 
claim to have done the research. The very worst 
that can be said about these men and women is that 
they are biased against vitamin therapy. 

But bias is universal. It probably is true that 
there never has been a. truly unbiased man. We all 
are biased in favor of those things we believe to be 
true. It is a myth that, somehow, scientists are less 
biased than artists, businessmen, or politicians. 
They may be expert at pretending objectivity, for 
that is the expected image of their profession, but 
they are just as closed-minded on just as many 
topics as the rest of us — no more, no less. Their 
bias against vitamin therapy is, under the circum- 
stances, boih natural and understandable. It may 
be deplorable, but it certainly is not sinister. 

Moving down the scale of motives, we come 
next to what might be called "careerism." The 
careerist is not a bad guy either, but he does suffer 
from a strong vested interest which often gets in the 


way of objectivity. It was described aptly by col- 
umnist Charles. McCabe: 

You might be wondering if the persionnel 
of the American Cancer Society, of 
cancer research foundations, and other 
sainted organizations, are truly interested 
in a cure for cancer. Or whether they 
would like the problem which supports 
* them to continue to exist. Yoli might even 
grow so base as to believe that there is a * 
certain personality type which is deeply 
attracted to exploitable causes. They 
might be called the true blue careerists. I 
recently had this type defined for me with 
admirable succinctness: 

"The crucial concept is that of a 
careerist, an individual who cdnverts a 
public problem into a personal career and 
rescues himself from obscurity, penury, 
or desperation. These men work with a 
dedication that may appear to be selfless 
so long as the problem is insoluble. 

"Should proposals for change in 
public policy or the normal evolution of 
our culture threaten resolution of the 
mess, it becomes apparent that they have 
a vested interest in maintaining the mag- 
nitude and emotional load of the 
problem . . . ." 


This strange and dangerous kind of re- 
former has always been with us. The type 
has gained a truly formidable acceptance 
in our time. These are the guys who know 
the answers for problems which do not, at 
the moment, have any convenient an- 
swers. They resist like hell the approach 
of any real answer which might threaten 
their holy selflessness. 1 

It is natural for the careerist to gravitate into 
such apparently humanitarian organizations as the 
American Cancer Society. Not only does this pro- 
vide him with the aura of status among his approv- 
ing friends, but it also provides some pretty nice 
employment in a low pressure field devoid of com- 
petition or of the economic necessity to show either 
a profit or even tangible results. In fact, it is the very 
lack of results that adds stature to his position and 
importance to his work. In this cushy atmosphere, 
the careerist leisurely dreams up endless schemes 
for raising funds. Sailors line up on the deck of an 
aircraft carrier to be photographed from the air as 
they spell out "Fight Cancer." Public buildings 
everywhere display posters bearing the slogan 
"Fight Cancer With a Check-up and a Check/* 
Housewives are recruited to hold rummage sales 
and to go from door to,door raising funds. Athletes 
are urged to participate in special sporting events. 
Employees are pressured to authorize payroll de- 

14 The Fearless Spectator/' San Francisco Chronicle, Sept. 27, 1971, 
p. 35. 


ductions. Service clubs are persuaded to sponsor 
information booths, carnivals, and movie- mobiles. 
And relatives of deceased cancer victims are en- 
couraged to have obituaries state ' ' the family prefers 
contributions to the American Cancer Society." 
In this way, the careerist is able to enlist the 
services of over two million volunteers each year 
who, in turn, collect about one hundred million 
dollars. Of this amount, only about one-fourth goes 
into actual research. None of it goes into the inves- 
tigation of possible nutritional factors. Once that 
door is opened, of course, the final solution to the 
cancer problem will walk right into those plush 
offices, stand on the deep pile carpet, and announce 
in no mistaken terms that the American Cancer 
Society, and those who work for it, are no longer 
needed. And, thus, will be fulfilled the promise 
contained in this official ACS statement: 

The American Cancer Society is an 
emergency organization, a temporary or- 
ganization, seeking in its independent 
Crusade to obtain enough dollars to wage 
an unrelenting fight against cancer. 1 

Perhaps that was afreudian slip, but notice that 
it did not say that the objective was to defeat 
cancer, but merely to fight cancer. Unless cancer is 
defeated, the fight could go on forever. The Ameri- 
can Cancer Society has been an "emergency or- 
ganization, a temporary organization" since 1913! 

"'American Cancer Society, Inc." ACS booklet, undated, p. 17. 


The tracks of the careerist are evident every- 
where. It is obvious that careerism has been an 
important factor in the opposition to vitamin 
therapy — not just in the field of cancer, but in multi- 
ple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy, and other non- 
infectious diseases as well. It is equally certain, 
however, that this opposition has not been the re- 
sult of conscious, premeditated malice. Rather, it 
has been, the product of the subconscious need 
which characterizes the careerist personality. We 
are still dealing with men and women who basically 
are innocent of evil intent. «> 

As we move down the scale of motives into the 
next category, however, the shading begins clearly 
to take on the hue of grey. The category is profit. 

Profit, per se, is neither good nor bad. It de- 
pends on the circumstances under which it is 
earned. Profitis merely another word for "pay." It 
is the compensation received by an individual- in 
return for risking his savings or for investing his 
time in a business venture. Profits, therefore, like 
other forms of pay, are good if they are earned in 
such a way that no one is coerced or cheated. So 
long as there is complete freedom of choice to buy 
or not to buy, or to buy from another source, and so 
long as all voluntary agreements between buyer and 
seller, lender and borrower, are fulfilled honestly, 
then the profits that result are fair — regardless of 
their size. But if any party to the transaction is 
coerced into terms or prices he would not otherwise 
accept, or if his options to take his business else- 
where have been limited by conspiracy or any other 


forces outside of free market competition, then the 
profits that result, no matter how small, are unfair 
because they have been garnered wholly or partly 
by force or deceit. It makes little difference if these 
acts are imposed by government, trade associa- 
tions, labor unions, cartels, or organized crime 

Obtaining money through coercion or decep- 
tion is the essence of theft. And it is this kind of 
Profit that now shows up on our scale. 

It long has been the policy of multi-national 
companies to operate in such a way as to reduce 
competition between themselves for the purpose of 
limiting consumer options, pushing prices above 
the natural level dictated by supply and demand, 
and, thus, realizing an artificially high level of 
profits. Such arrangements between companies are 
called restraint-of-trade agreements. The chemical 
and pharmaceutical industries are well-known to 
have been both the. pioneers of and the leading 
participants in cartel restraint-of-trade. Much of the 
vicious and totally dishonest opposition to non- 
drug therapy in canCer can be understood only with 
this fact in mind. 

The reality of price-fixing in the field of drugs 
shows itself in many ways. One of them is that some 
drugs manufactured in the United States are sold 
much cheaper if they are destined for other coun- 
tries. To lower the prices in America, even though 
the drugs are produced there, would violate price- 
support agreements. As pointed out by Senator 
Gaylord Nelson, Chairman of the Senate Small 


Business Subcommittee on Monopoly: 

Yes, many American drug companies sell 
drugs to domestic'wholesalers at different 
prices, depending on where the drug is to 
be used. If the domestic wholesaler states 
that the drug will be shipped overseas, his 
price may well be fifty percent lower. It 
would be hard to find a more glaring case 
of price discrimination against the 
American consumer than this one. 1 

Artificially inflated prices are not the only by- 
product of cartel agreements. Scarcity of product 
selection, or no product at all, sometimes can be 
much worse. We are not speaking here of limiting 
the number of manufacturers for a particular pro- 
duct within a particular territory — although that is 
bad enough — but of holding a product off the mar- 
ket completely so as to more fully exploit an exist- 
ing product that may be more profitable. This ap- 
pears to have been the rationale behind the Stan- 
dard Oil-Shell decision to de-emphasize its hydro- 
genation process whereby it can make high-grade 
gasoline from low-grade coal (an interesting 
thought-for-the-day during contemporary periods 
of so-called "energy crisis"). 

In the field of medicine, it was this same 
artificial manipulation of markets that led to the 
unconscionable delay in the use of sulfa. Richard 

14t Ask Them Yourself/' Family Weekly, News Chronicle, Oct. 7, 
1973, p. 1. 


Sasuly comments: 

I.G. Farben sometimes held back new 
products or methods. The sulfa drugs are 

a case in point There were American 

cartel partners of the I.G. who were wil- 
ling to rest on what looked like assured 
markets and therefore held back new 
developments .... 

I.G. had been holding back from the pub- 
lic of the whole world a great life-saver 
because it wanted a product which it 
could patent and hold exclusively . 
It is difficult and painful to try to estimate 
the number of lives which might have 
been saved if sulfanilamide had not been 
buried in the laboratories of a vast 
monopoly which had been trying to pick 
its own most profitable time for granting ..~ 
new medicines to the public. 1 

The super-profits of the drug and research in- 
dustry are, needless to say, greatly enhanced by the 
rising toll of cancer. A substantial portion of the 
income for these industries now is channeled 
through the federal government and winds up in the 
pockets of politically favored individuals and in- 
stitutions. With the federal cancer budget now run- 
ning over one and a half billion dollars a year, the 
potential for corruption is enormous. 

'Sasuly, I.G. Farben, op. cit., pp. 134, 135, 32. 


"Who needs the primitive old fashioned form 
of graft in government," asks Dr. Krebs, "when a 
division of HEW can aseptically award Hoffman- 
LaRoche with a $ 1 ,250,000 contract for 5-FU 'clin- 
ical investigation' of this drug when, without patent 
protection, the same amount of the chemical could 
be produced for about $17,000?" 1 

With the subject of graft and political corrup- 
tion, we now have arrived at a fourth and still lower 
strata of motives, a strata that must not be over- 
looked if we are to understand and cope with those 
forces acting against freedom of choice in cancer 
therapy. It is a fact of life that there are those with 
political ambitions who will seize upon any excuse 
for the expansion of their influence and power over 
others. The cancer crisis is tailor-made for their 
objectives. While they may have had no part in 
creating that crisis, nevertheless their professed in- 
terest in solving it is largely a sham and a ploy to win 
approval of the voters and to further secure them- 
selves in the seat of governmental power. 

As government becomes more onerous and 
oppressive to the people, it needs public relations 
tidbits to reassure and mollify the restless citizen. If 
a resented dictatorship could successfully hold off 
public knowledge of vitamin B17 until after it has 
funded billions for research in a much ballyhooed 
"war on cancer," andif the final solution to the 
cancer problem can be sold to the people as a "vic- 
tory" in that war, then the masses could be further 
conditioned to accept government as the logical 

1 Letter to the author dated Dec. 26, 1972. 


agent in the field of medicine and even might be 
persuaded to view their dictatorship with worship- 
ping' eyes of trust and gratitude. "Big brother may 
be harsh," they will say, "but he is good!" 

There is much to be learned in this regard by 
observing the pattern of Hitler's rise to power. En- 
couraged by the cartels in the background, the 
German parliament had expanded Bismarck's ini- 
tial plan. of government medical care until it had 
become a dominant aspect of everyday life in pre- 
Nazi Germany. Matthew Lynch and Stanley 
Raphael, in their scholarly study, Medicine and the 
State, tell us: 

Although it is difficult to estimate with 
any precision how great >a role this 
[socialist] network played in assisting the 
Nazi rise to power, there can be little 
doubt that it was a considerable one. The 
administration of social insurance 
reached into every corner of the country, 
and at least 70 per cent of its personnel 
belonged to the ADGB [German Gen- 
eral Trade Union Congress] which was 
taken over by the Nazis. The whole so- 
cial insurance structure, and its sickness 
division in particular, was a natural, 
ready-made network for the spread of 
Nazi influence and control. 1 

^ynch and Raphael, Medicine and the State, (originally published 
1963 by Charles C. Thomas. Reprinted by Association of American 
Physicians and Surgeons, Oak Brook, 111., 1973), p. 34. 


Socialized medicine's value to the success of 
Nazism also was recognized by the Canadian 
parliament's committee on health insurance. In a 
special report issued in March of that year, the 
committee stated bluntly: 

During the early years of Hitler' s regime , 
the government's medical programme 
was looked upon by many observers as 
one of the greatest props of the to- . 
. talitarian state. 1 

Following in the footsteps of Bismarck and 
Hitler, American political leaders for years have 
been competing with each other to see which one 
can push the nation faster and deeper into a 
government health care program. Not one promi- 
nent voice in Washington ever has been raised in 
favor of actually reducing present levels of 
government involvement. Consequently, year after 
year, we move closer and closer to a system of 
medicine advocated and practiced by all totalitarian 

In spite of continuing political pressures from 
above, the American people have been slow to 
embrace government medicine, especially since 
they have been able to see the disastrous conse- 
quences of similar programs in other countries. But 
their resistance has been weakened tremendously 
by the rapidly rising costs of medical care, most of 
which can be attributed directly to the fantastic 

Report of the Advisory Committee on Health Insurance, March 16, 
1943, (King's Printer, Ottawa), p. 108. 


costs of orthodox cancer therapy. In other words, if 
an inexpensive control for cancer werp to be made 
available today, the nation's medical bill would be 
so drastically reduced that tomorrow there would 
be little steam left in the boiler for government 
intervention in this vital field. The politician and the 
bureaucrat may speak with concern over the rising 
costs of medical care, but secretly they are de- 
lighted because this provides them with a cause 
celebre, a justification for their expansionist pro- 

The Honorable John G. Schmitz, former Con- 
gressman from California, in a special report to his 
constituents dated October 27, 1971, offered this 

Very early in this year's Congressional 
session, Senator Edward Kennedy intro- 
duced with enormous fanfare a bill (S. 34) 
grandiloquently entitled "The Conquest 
of Cancer Act. "Its formula for conquer- 
ing cancer was very simple, if a bit, shop- 
worn: set up a new Federal bureau with 
lots of money. 

Assuming— quite correctly, as it turned 
out — that opposition to the "Conquest of 
Cancer Act" would promptly be labelled 
as tantamount to being in favor of cancer, 
- * President Nixon got in line with his own 
"Conquest of Cancer Act," differing in 
no essential respect from Senator 
Kennedy's bill but carrying a different 


number (S. 1828). This bill passed the 
Senate by the lopsided vote of 70 to 1 . 

The "railroad" was on, and the Ameri- 
can Cancer Society, in full page adver- 
tisements in the New York Times and the 
two major Washington papers, had the 
unmitigated gall to state that "objections 
to the bill have come.mainly from people 
who do not have expert cancer knowl- 
edge." My files bulge with statements 
from some of the outstanding scientists, . 
physicians, and cancer researchers in the 
United States opposing the Kennedy- 
Nixon grandstand play, including one 
signed by no less than four Nobel prize 
winners in medicine .... 

Another sprawling bureaucracy is not 
going to find either cause or cure any fas- 
ter. More likely, it will actually hamper 
the search for them by "locking in" the 
present preconceptions and biases of re- 
searchers specializing strictly in this field. 

The quantity of tax dollars squandered on blind 
alley cancer research projects is staggering. Ameri- 
cans will tolerate any absurdity, it seems, so long as 
it is promoted as an attempt to resolve some popular 
"crisis." The "crisis" in Vietnam, the "crisis" in 
the Middle-East, the ecology "crisis," the energy 
4 'crisis," the population "crisis"— the list is limited 
only by the creative 1 imagination of the man- 


ipulators and the naive gullibility of the manipu- 
lated. Each crisis is built up in the public mind as a 
prelude to their willing acceptance of still further 
encroachment upon their liberties. 

In August of 1 973 , President Nixon announced 
difive year plan in the battle against cancer. Rem- 
iniscent of the classical Soviet approach to such 
problems, this really was an announcement that the 
"crisis" had become institutionalized. It was a 
guarantee that the goals would not be achieved. 
Each failure will result in revised goals, greatly 
expanded bureaucracy, and another five year plan. 

The federal budget for the cancer * ' crisis" now 
is over half a billion dollars a year and is steadily 
climbing. As Congressman Schmitz observed, 
"The railroad is on," and it is a gravy train in the 
grand political tradition. 

Government control over scientific research 
almost never produces usable results, except in the 
field of destructive weapons and related hardware 
such as rocketg. The reason is that this'is the only 
field in which government has ^primary interest. It 
is a question of instinct for self-survival and gov- 
ernments, like living creatures, have this instinct. 
In fact, it is the only government instinct that can be 
relied upon with any degree of certainty , and it will 
be activated just as readily against its own citizens 
as it wi}l against those of a rival government — which 
is why there are such things as revolutions. 

Those who feel that government should direct 
non-military scientific projects, such as the quest 
for cancer control, would do well to ponder the 
significance of a report in the Los A ngeles Times of 


December 6, 1972. After describing at some length 
the massive? undertaking of an international cancer 
research program (the I ARC) — a joint venture of 
the governments of the United States, the Soviet 
Union, France, Britain, West Germany, Italy, the 
Netherlands, Belgium, Australia, and Japan — the 
article stated that the agency had recently acquired 
massive headquarters in a six million dollar building 
in Lyon, France. And then it explained: 

Now, seven years after its founding, and 
two weeks after moving into a new four- 
teen story headquarters building in Lyon, 
the agency feels it has come to terms with 
its own personality. 1 

Incredible as it may seem, after seven years of 
research, after the expenditure of untold millions of 
tax dollars from eleven countries, and after taking 
occupancy of a six million dollar, fourteen story 
building, all that this government project can show 
for results is the exciting discovery that "it has 
come to terms with its own personality." 

Such are the predictable fruits of all govern- 
ment growths in the orchard of non- military sci- 

The steel ring of government control percep- 
tively tightens around our necks. We are told what 
foods we may or may not eat, what vitamins we may 
purchase and in what potency or combinations, 
what medical treatments we may seek, whom we 

14t Cancer Control Inquiry Reaches Around World/* LA. Times, 
Dec. 6, 1972, p. A-2. 


may hire, what we must pay, what prices we may 
charge, to whom we must sell, where our children 
must go to school, what they must learn, and soon 
we are to be told what physician to see and what 
drugs to take. Each of these insults to our individu- 
ality has been inspired by a series of national or 
international "crises."' The end result isthat there 
now is a crisis much more serious and real than all 
the others put together. It is a crisis of personal 

The people of the United States, as well as 
those in every other country in the world, step-by- 
step are traveling the road to bondage. They are 
following the pied piper of big government playing 
the beguiling tunes of security, brotherhood, and 
equality. At the end of that road lies the cage of a 
world totalitarian regime deceptively decorated for 
now as an international democratic forum where 
men of good will can come together in the cause of 

It is no secret that the U.N. is the special 
creation of the same international groupings that 
comprise the world's hidden cartel structure. The 
role played in the United States by the Rockefeller 
grouping and the Council on Foreign Relations has 
been chronicled in a previous chapter and need not 
be repeated. It should be recognized, however,, 
that, for over three decades, the only consistent and 
firmly pursued foreign policy objective of the State 
Department (staffed almost exclusively by mem- 
bers of the CFR) has been to hasten the strengthen- 
ing of the U.N. into a true world government and to 
bring about the subordination to it of all nations- 


— including the United States. On the assumption 
that sovereignty among nations is the cause of war, 
the Grand Design of U.S. foreign policy is to elimi- 
nate all such sovereignty by transferring control of 
the entire world's military might — especially nu- 
clear weapons — into the hands of U.N. politicians. 
Under the slogan* of disarmament for peace, 
therefore, the wheels now are in motion to create a 
world political entity entirely in the hands of the 
international finpols who created it. With ultimate 
control over all nuclear weapons, that super- state 
will be so powerful that no man or no disarmed 
nation-state could resist its edicts. 1 

It is impossible to understand U.S. foreign pol- 
icy without this background knowledge. Every- 
thing done by present leaders of the United States 
conforms to this goal of world government. 
Everything! Before it would be possible to merge 
the United States with the rest of the nations of the 
world, it would be necessary to bring their 
economies and standards of living into line. That 
means massive foreign aid to the less developed 
nations to bring them up and all kinds of wasteful 
spending, exhausting wars, and shortage-creating 
restrictions to bring the United States down. 

The subject of foreign policy is relevant to the 
politics of cancer. Just as it was learned years after 

*For a more detailed analysis of this question, the reader is referred to 
three previous works by the author: The Fearful Master -A Second 
Look at the United Nations, The Grand Design -An Overview of U.S. 
Foreign Policy, and The Capitalist Conspiracy -An Inside View of 
International Banking. All three publications may be ordered' from 
American Media, Box 1365, Thousand Oaks, Calif. 91360. 


the fact that the American space program was de- 
liberately, held back at the highest decision levels in 
Washington so as to give the Soviets the interna- 
tional prestige of putting up the first artificial satel- 
lite (which brought their scientific and military 
credibility up in the eyes of the world and provided 
further justification foi> American disarmament 
concessions), it also is quite possible that the same 
motivation is partially responsible for holding back 
public awareness of a control for cancer. It is now 
quite obvious that American political leaders are 
extremely anxious to have the cure for cancer come 
from another country or at least as a result of inter- 
national efforts. Once again, we. find that their 
primary concern is to make sure that the ultimate 
victory will be achieved in such a way as not to 
enhance the prestige or position of the United 
States but to further the concept of internationalism 
and the goal of world government. 

In January, 1972, former presidential candi- 
date Hubert Humphrey put it this way: 

There is rich precedent for making the 
U.N. our forum. We used it to get the 
treaty that prohibits putting weapons in 
outer space. And the one that does the 
same for the seabed. Now we hope to get 
an international agreiement on the envi- 
ronment there. Why not also for the 
global war on cancer? Sholild diplomats 
be the only ones to talk in the U.N. about 
war, arms control, and peace treaties? 
Why can't doctors talk there, too, about 


ways of enlisting all mankind in advanc- 
ing scientific medicine? 1 

An article from UP! dated February 1, 1972, 
reported that President Nixon had ordered his top 
cancer officials to work closely with other nations, 
particularly the Soviet Union and the Peoples Re- 
public of China. The article stated: "Nixon stres- 
sed that he wanted the anti-cancer campaign to be 
an international effort.' 72 

In September of that same year, President 
Nixon addressed the National Cancer Conference 
at the Biltmore Hotel in Los Angeles. During his 
speech, he stressed that cancer research was one of 
the main forces through which peoples of the world 
can "work for peace." The concept of "peace," of 
course, usually is offered as a political synonym for 
world government and the U.N. Nixon ex- 

Perhaps the fight against cancer can help 
to teach the world that, despite immense 
differences between cultures and values 
and political systems, nations must work 
together to meet their common 1 needs. 
Like drug abuse, like hijacking, like 
terrorism, .cancer is an international 

144 We Must Pool the World's Anti-Cancer Resources," Hubert H. 
Humphrey, Family Weekly, Jan. 23, 1972, p. 14. 

244 World Cancer Battle Waged," UPI, The Daily Review, Hayward, 
Calif., Feb.J, 1972. 


menace. We must confront it with an in- 
ternational alliance. 1 

At the risk of becoming redundant, it should be 
stated once again that big government is the neces- 
sary ally of monopoly, and world government is the 
goal of the cartelists and finpols who have been the 
quiet, seemingly philanthropic sponsors and pro- 
moters of the U.N. from its very inception. The fact 
that the majority of Americans are unaware of this 
fact or that they &re sincere in their hopes for inter- 
national peace and brotherhood does not alter the 
grim reality one bit. Everything the cartels and 
multi-national companies do is in furtherance of one 
or both of their two objectives:the creation of great- 
er wealth for those who control them and the co- . 
alescing of all political power into fewer and fewer 
hands with the apex of that power converging into 
world government — and with themselves firmly in 
control from behind the scenes. 

Anthony Sampson in his book The Sovereign 
State of ITT, touched upon this phenomenon when 
he wrote: 

That multinational companies need a 
more effective control is accepted by 
many of their own employees. But who 
can control them? The conventional rem- 
edy is for the nations to organize them- 
selves into greater units, and eventually 

144 Cancer War A Force for Peace— Nixon," LA. Herald Examiner, 
Sept. 28, 1972, p. 1. 


into some kind of world government, in 
order to limit the abuses; the multi- 
national enterprises would thus stimulate 
world society through a contained pro- 
cess of conflict. 1 

Charles Levinson, secretary-general of the In- 
ternational Federation of Chemical and General 
Workers' Union in Geneva, has learned about the 
cartel from years of first hand knowledge and con- 
frontation, and he tells it like it is. This is how he 
told it to the Wall Street Journal as published on 
June 17, 1974: 

Geneva — When the United Nations 
held hearings here late last year on the 
problems posed by multinational com- 
panies, officials assumed that one of the 
star witnesses would be trade unionist 
Charles Levinson. 

After all, they reasoned, he is a prolific 
author on the topic, passionately eager to 
challenge the multinationals and articu- 
lately at home in the. spotlight. Besides, 
he lives just up the hill from the Palaies 
des Nations hearing room. 

But Mr. Levinson declined the invitation 
to testify — for reasons that went some- 
thing like this: "One, I'm not a clown. 

l Op. cit. t pp. 304, 305. 


Two, I'm not a member of the Atlantic 
. Council. Three, I don't fornicate with the 
foundations." . • 

Instead of seeking truth, Mr. Levinson 
says, the UN officials wanted "clowns" 
to perform in a forum carefully contrived 
to make the UN look alive while giving 
the multinationals a protective coat of 
whitewash. In Mr. Levinson's view, the 
UN and such prestigious private groups 
as the Washington-based Atlantic Coun- 
cil and the Rockefeller Foundation are all 
parts of an international elite that man- 
ages, much of the world's business, fi- 
nance, politics, and even wars, to its own 
advantage. . . . 

Does that mean Mr. Levinson is out to 
destroy the multi-nationals? "No, no, no, 
absolutely not," he says. "You cannot be 
against multinationals as such. It isn't 
possible." There is "no possibility of a 
modern enterprise functioning in today's 
world" unless it attains a global scale, he 

Nor does his avowed socialism mean he 
would like to see all the giants 
nationalized someday. "I am no longer in 
support of the collectivization of the 
means of production according to classi- 
cal Marxist concept," he states. In fact, 


he adds, "I am afraid of extensive 
nationalization. "It would only concen- 
trate more power in the hands of au- 
thoritarian right-wing regimes . . . while 
in eastern Europe state ownership has 
meant "merely replacing one group of 
elitists with another." 

What Mr. Levinson does want goes 
beyond ordinary bread-and-butter un- 
ionism to what he depicts $s a last chance 
to preserve a measure of human freedom 
against a capitalist-Communist conspi- 
racy. ... 

As things look from his austere office in a 
luxury building, companies are "au- 
thoritarian" and increasingly inter- 
locked. ' ' Look at that chart on the wall," 
Mr. Levinson says with a gesture. The 
pale-blue paper bears the names of the 
world's 50 largest chemical companies, 
listed both horizontally and vertically 
with black dots to show the joint ventures 
they have with one another. "I stopped 
doing them," he says. "That thing would 
have become black." Among the major 
petroleum companies, "I counted 2,000 
joint ventures" before stopping, he says, 
and he estimates that they probably have 
10,000. Before long, he predicts, all mod- 
ern industries will be "completely con- 
trolled and dominated by a handful of 


multinational companies, all interlinked, 
all joint-ventured, all financially integ- 
rated in the same banking consortia/'. . . 

To a large extent, he says, the power is 
"centered within David Rockefeller's 
operation." This sphere encompasses, 
he charges, not only the Chase Manhat- 
tan Bank, which Mr. Rockefeller chairs, 
but also the big oil companies, Secretary 
of State Henry Kissinger and many cor- 
porations that Mr. Levinson sees as 
linked through foundations in two ways: 
The corporations' executives run the 
foundations, and the foundations own 
shares of the corporations. 1 

Many people have been so sheltered from the 
hard economic and political realities of the world 
that they find it almost impossible to believe that 
such worthy endeavors as world peace or cancer 
research have been twisted and degraded to serve 
the selfish motives of a few. The thought, of mali- 
cious conspiracy hiding behind the smiling mask of 
humanitarianism is repugnant to their minds and 
alien to their experience. Europeans tend to be 
more alert to this possibility for their political his- 
tory is so filled with conspiracies that they look 
upon them more as the rule than as the exception. 
Americans, however, have not had this historical 

141 How One Man Helps Unions Match Wits With Multinationals," by 
Richard F. Janssen, Wall Street Journal, June 17, 1974. 


experience, and the average citizen is vulnerable 
because of it. Judging all others by his own stan- 
dards, he cannot believe that there are men who 
would sacrifice the lives of others for the advance- 
ment of their own positions. Perhaps in other 
countries, yes, but not in America* It is as though 
the casting of his personal ballot somehow has 
sanctified his candidates and made them incapable 
of selfish motives or foul deeds. Consequently, 
many people instinctively back away from any 
thought of there being a conscious direction behind 
the opposition to Laetrile and prefer to believe that 
all is ignorance and bureaucratic bungling. 

It is possible, of course, to view the long his- 
tory of harassment as just that. But exactly the 
same argument is offered as an excuse in all the 
other problem areas of society. We are told that 
inflation, for instance, is not consciously planned; it 
just happens because of ignorance and bureaucratic 
bungling. Price controls and rationing are not 
planned either; they are merely the unfortunate 
consequences of ignorance and bureaucratic bungl- 
ing. The growing roles of welfare recipients are not 
planned; they merely are the result of fallacious 
idealism and bureaucratic bungling. Rising crime is 
not planned by anyone but is just the result of 
short-sighted judicial philosophy and bureaucratic 
bungling. Gasoline shortages and. the energy crisis 
are not the result of conspiracy but of an unforeseen 
Middle-East conflict and bureaucratic bungling. 

The exhaustion of the nation's reserves in con- 
tinual no-win wars is not the result of design but 
merely a lack of clear foreign policy objectives and 


bureaucratic bungling. The ever-increasing rules,, 
regulations, subsidies, and restraints connected 
with every phase of our lives — none of this is 
planned, you understand; it is just the accidental 
outcome of ignorance at all levels of society and, of 
course, bureaucratic bungling. 

It might be possible to accept that any one, or 
two, or even a dozen of these tragedies are not 
planned, but when all the pieces are fitted together 
like a giant jig-saw puzzle, an obvious pattern 
emerges that is obscured when looking only at one 
or two pieces at a time. The design is so clear, so 
uniform, and so universal that it defies all rationality 
to think that its existence is mere coincidence. The 
pattern, simply stated, is this: In every one of these 
problem areas, the only tangible and consistent 
product of all effort and expenditures is the growth , 
of government control over its citizens. Further- 
more, the very people who stand to benefit most 
from this trend, either financially or politically, al- 
ways are in the forefront of the effort to convince 
others that such growth of government is both 
necessary and desirable. And thirdly, these recip- 
ients of power are not ignorant, either of historical 
perspective or of current realities. From their point 
of view, they are not bungling the job. 

Let us acknowledge that it is not at all neces- 
sary for political or industrial leaders to consciously 
choose the suffering and death of millions in order 
for that to be the result of their schemes. 

A man may pursue his business with such in- 
tensity and singlemindedness that both his family 
and health suffer greatly. In the end, he may lose his 


wife and even his life, but that was rtot his goal. 

Likewise, men of finance and politics do not 
have to sit down together in one giant cabal and 
decide to hold back Laetrile or vitamin therapy, and 
it is certain that they do not consciously seek to 
commit genocide by thwarting a line of research 
that they know will lead to life-saving discoveries. 
Most of what has happened in this field is the blind 
result of forces and policies previously set in motion 
in the quest of other economic and political goals. 
Their organizations and institutions react 
reflexively against any obstacle to drug profits. The 
result is a scientific quagmire which pow is claiming 
millions of lives each year. The fact that, occasion- 
ally, one of them also js drawn into that 
quagmire— as for instance when Winthrop Rock- 
efeller died of cancer in 1973 — is small consolation 

The fact that some of the top financial and 
political leaders of the world have died of cancer is 
strong evidence to support the conclusion that 
much of the opposition to Laetrile in the past has 
been more a result of general rather than specific 
conflicts of interest. It is important to understand, 
therefore, that many of those who, for financial or 
political reasons, have opposed the development of 
Laetrile have not done so with any desire to cause 
suffering and death. Their single, all-consuming 
drive has been to expand their financial and political 
power. And anything that gets in the way must be 
destroyed. i 

Laetrile got in the ^ay. First the nutritional 
concept upon which it rests is anathema to the 


multi-billion dollar drug industry. Second, the fact 
that it is a product of free-enterprise was an affront 
to the bureaucracy of big government. Third, the 
final solution to -the cancer problem surely will ter- 
minate the gigantic cancer research industry, most 
of the radio-therapy industry, and much of the 
surgery now being performed. Loss of revenue in 
these fields will be catastrophic to thousands of 
professional fund-raisers, researchers, and techni- 
cians. And fourth, the elimination of cancer from 
-the national medical bill will reduce the average 
cost of medical care each year so drastically that 
much of the current political pressure for socialized 
.medicine will evaporate into thin air. Ves, Laetrile' 
definitely got in the way. 

These reflections lead inexorably to the con- 
clusion that, while thenp may not be a specific 
conspiracy to hold back a control for cancer, there 
definitely is a general ccmspiracy which produces 
those results just the same. Ferdinand Lundberg, in 
his The Rich and the Super-Rich, approached the 
subject this way: 

" Actually, the results at both the top and 
^the bottom are contrived. They are the 
outcome of pertinacious planning .... 
In any event, overeager members of the 
financial elite have been caught and con- 
victed in American courts of many literal 
subconspiracies, so that even in the nar- 
row juristic sense many of them stand 
forth individually as certified simon-pure 
conspirators. Consequently, even if there 


is not a single all-embracing conspiracy in 
juristic terms, it is a fact that there are and 
have been hundreds of adjudicated single 
conspiracies. The conspiracy theory, 
then, has a little more to it than honors- 
bound academics concede. 1 

Dr. Ernst T. Krebs, Jr., writing to Dr. John 
Richardson in 1971, stated: s 

The view of the "limited conspiracy" is 
something with which we all can4ive. 
This holds that government has unwit- 
tingly been used as a tool in behalf of 
powerful special interests. Those of us 
who live with the view of the "limited- 
conspiracy" treat it as something as real 
as the air we breathe .... 

When you witness our so-called leaders 
in Washington, no longer even making a 
.pretense at moral behavior but accepting 
the insults of truth with indifference , one 
finds the' conspiratorial theory quite 
plausible. It would seem that only men 
who are acting on orders under a plan ° 
would continue to flaunt their corrupt 
practices before the world. Such men can 
have no real concern of interest in the 
welfare of their country, which they 
openly degrade . . . . 2 

l Op.cit., pp. 21,327. 

2 Letters dated March 9 and August 3, 1971 . 


To better understand the limited or specific 
conspiracy in the field of cancer, let us imagine a tall 
cylinder. The cylinder represents a conglomerated 
interests, some competing, some overlapping, 
some in a state of change. All of them, however, are 
bound together by the mutual desire to enhance 
personal wealth and power by using the force of 
government to eliminate competition. There are 
many strata within that cylinder. In fact, almost 
every level of human activity is represented: bank- 
ing, commerce, industry, medicine, education, law, 
politics, to name just a few. What we have done in 
this study is merely to examine one slice out of that 
cylinder. We have reached into the broad stratum of 
medicine and removed only one thin cross-section 
marked cancer. Unfortunately, what we have ex- 
posed there can be duplicated at any level if only we 
could spare the time to look. - 

The reality, therefore, is that there is both a 
specific or limited conspiracy and a general or all- 
encompassing one. In the field of cancer, as in all 
other fields., the primary conscious motives of those 
who conspire are not to create suffering, slavery, or 
death, but to further their own wealth and power. 
None but a very-few of the most ruthless at the top 
ever stop to consider the ultimate consequences of 
their acts. Most are swept along by the momentum 
of their own institutions. They either go along and 
are rewarded or they drop away and are crushed. 

Thus, the conspiracy becomes as a living, 
self-propagating organism. Parasitically, it grows 
and feeds upon those who are not part of it. It saps 
our freedoms and the fruits of our labor through the 


sucking tentacles of government. It must be 
stopped before it completely exhausts arid 
destroys its host. 

What possible force can be strong enough to 
break the fatal grip? Is there anything that can rip 
away this parasite before it is too late?' 

There is. It is the invincible forpe of public 
opinion. Even dictatorships tremble at its spectre 
for, once aroused and rallied behind valiant leader- 
ship, there is no political or military power on earth 
that can match it. 

Already one can feel a growing backlash at the 
grass roots level. With thousands of cancer victims 
as living testimony to the effectiveness of vitamin 
B17, with hundreds of thousands discovering on 
their own the value of organic nutrition in direct 
contradiction to the FDA-AMA position, witlTBil- 
lie Sol Estes and Watergate-type scandals leading 
millions to realize thai they neither can believe nor 
trust their political leaders, we are comHig rapidly 
to a point of open resistance to government which 
could make the Boston Tea Party look like child's 
Play. _ 

There are still a few, of course, who, in spite of 
everything, continue to reassure themselves that 
totalitarian government could never be imposed on 
the American people. With each new edict and each 
new loss, of personal liberty, they respond cheer- 
fully. "Don't worry. It can't happen here." 

To which Dr. Krebs replies: 

U.S.S.R. people are prevented from 


fleeing the country because their masters 
tell them they are not fit to choose the 
political system under which they are to 
live. The choice must be made for 
. them .... In the U.S.A. cancer victims 
are prevented from fleeing for their lives 
for Laetrile in foreign countries because 
their government tells these people they 
are not fit to decide such matters for 
themselves .... 

Those who feed the refugees from the 
U.S.S.R. are prosecuted .... Those 
who feed the cancer refugees from the 
U.S.A. with admittedly harmless acces- 
sory food (vitamin Bi7), are similarly 
prosecuted and persecuted. 

knows no boundaries. Unopposed, it 
- flourishes malignantly^. How great it 
. would be if even a very small society of 
patriotic American physicians, banding - 
together, could invoke the Nuremberg 
principles of defying government in its 
evil or murderous ends and defiantly use 
Laetrile. 1 

The mood of rebellion is in the air. Increas- 
ingly, men and' women who never dreamed of 
breaking the law are responding to the principles of 
Nuremberg. They are being driven to choose be- 

v Open Letter on occasion of arrest of Mrs. Mary C. Whelchel, Feb. 28, 


tween loyalty to the system or loyalty to con- 
science. In some cases they must even cftoose be- 
tween the law or life itself. Many are coming to 
rfealize that the system which commanded their loy- 
alty in the past is no longer a reality. It is a hollow 
shell, a democratic facade thinly veiling the stark 
structure of dictatorship. When they pledge al- 
legiance to the United States of America and to the 
Republic for which it stood, they do so in sadness as 
one bids a last requiem farewell at the funeral of a 
departed loved one. 

This is the mood and character of that grass- 
root? public opinion that can and will break the grip 
of the conspiracy. It already is too late to be other- 
wise. We have come to the last depot stop where 
men who value their scientific credentials or their 
personal honor must eitherget on board or miss the 
train altogether, because that train is going to keep 
its schedule with % hi story —with them or without 



Areas of need for future research 

with Bn; how the Laetrile 

controversy differs from cancer 

therapy controversies of the past; 

aw analogy between biological 

and political cancer; and a future 

projection of how both can be 

conquered together. 

Considering the lack of beneficial results ob- 
tained by orthodox medicine, it has been said that 
voodoo witchcraft would be just as effective — and 
perhaps even more so — -. for at least then the patient 
would be spared the deadly side effects of radiation 
and chemical poisoning. Just as we are amused 
today at the primitive medical practices of history, 
future generations surely will look back at our own 
era and cringe at the senseless cutting, burning, and 
poisoning that now passes for medical science. 

The advocates of vitamin B17 are the first to 
admit that there is yet much to learn about the 
natural mechanisms involved in the cause and con- 
trol of cancer and that there is need for continued 
caution and understatement. For one thing, there is 



a growing suspicion among experienced clinicians 
.that B17 in foods is more effective than in the cur- 
rently processed and concentrated forms. They 
would prefer their patients to obtain it in this natural 
state except fo°r the fact that it is next to impossible, 
to ingest sufficient quantities that way to be 
therapeutically effective in the treatment of ad- 
vanced cancer. When the patient needs massive 
dos^s quickly, the physician has only one recourse, 
and that is to administer B17 in the highly concen- 
trated, purified, and injectable form. But in the 
process it is possible that other trace substances 
associated with B17 as it occurs in the natural state 
may have been eliminated — substances which 
either act against cancer themselves, or.which may 
serve a$ catalysts causing either the B17 to function 
more efficiently or stimulating still other 
mechanisms of the body into action. Just as it is 
believed by some that organic vitamins obtained 
from red foods are superior to man-made or synthe- 
tic vitamins because of the trace substances found 
in one but not in the other, so, too, there is a grow- 
ing respect for B17 in the natural stated At any rate, 
even though the basic truths have been unlocked, 
there is still much to learn, and Laetrile advocates 
humbly admit the need for continued research. 

There have beeft many other medical con- 
troversies centered around cancer therapy. 

1 Regardless of what people may believe in this respect, recent FDA 
rulings, if they are allowed to stand, will make it illegal for anyone to 
claim or even imply that vitamin supplements derived from organic 
sources are superior to those that are synthesized. In fact, they will 
even forbid the manufacturer to identify the source oh his label. Thus, 
truth in packaging is declared illegal by the FDA! 


Perhaps the best publicized of these was Dr. An- 
drew Ivy's chemical formula known as Krebiozen. 
The Laetrile controversy is substantially different 
from most of the others, however, in that the for- 
mula has not been kept a secret. Its chemical com- 
position and its action has been openly described 
and willingly shared with all who express an in- 
terest. There are no enforceable patents on its man- 
ufacture and, consequently, no profits to its dis- 
coverer. Dr. Krebs has stated that he has no pro- 
prietary interest in Laetrile of any kind, has never 
received payment for the formula, and has never 
refused to share his technical knowledge with any- 
one who desired to manufacture it. His standard 
reply to all such inquiries is: "Laetrile is the prop- 
erty of all mankind. * * 

A significant aspect of the Laetrile controversy, 
therefore, is that the proponents have nothing to 
gai^, while the detractors have much to lose. Ad- 
mittedly, as long as Laetrile is forced by the FDA 
into a black market operation, those who manufac- 
ture and distribute it can be expected to derive 
substantial profits. These profits y however, merely 
will reflect the necessary and fair price paid by 
those who are not willing to run the risk of impris- 
onment to those who are. After public opinion 
forces the legalization of Laetrile, the price, of 
course, will plummet. After that, there will be a 
transition period of a few years in which vitamin B17 
will be manufactured in various concentrated forms 
in order to treat existing cancer victims. This, too, 
will be a source of income, but, in the absence of 
government restrictions favoring any one or two 


manufacturers, others will be attracted into the field 
and the resulting honest competition can be ex- 
pected to bring the cost of injectible B17 even lower 
— perhaps to less than one-tenth of present levels. 
The cost of low concentrate tablets for routine daily 
use probably will drop to about the same as that of 
any other vitamin, perhaps even lower. 

The most encouraging part of all, however, is 
that, even if government were to succeed in totally 
stopping the supply of Laetrile, we still could obtaia 
all the vitamin Bn we need to maintain normal 
health, and we could do so quite legally by selecting 
the appropriate food. It is abundant in the seeds of 
apricots, peaches, plums, nectarines, cherries, ber- 
ries, and apples. It is found in lima beans, bean 
sprouts, millet, arid many othier foods. It may take a 
little effort to obtain it, but no government action — 
short of imprisonment itself — r- can stop us from 
doing, so. 

Once the story of vitamin B17 is widely known, 
once ground nitriloside-bearing seeds are used on 
our foods as a routine seasoning, then the battle 
against cancer finally will* be won. In the wake of 
that battle, of course, there will be many pitiful ^ 
casualties, men and women who learned the truth 
too late. Some, mercifully, may be brought back 
from the edge of the grave for an uncertain time, but 
they will bear the disfiguring scars of their wounds 
from surgery and radiation. They may be relieved 
from pain, but no amount of B17 can repair their 
bodies or return them to total health. Others more 
fortunate, who were treated sooner and who es- 
caped the butchery of orthodox therapy, will return 


to a fully normal and productive fife completely 
fulfilling their expected span of years. In all such 
cases, however, substantial maintenance doses will 
be required to prevent the bpdy's metabolic barrier 
from breaking once again at the weak spot of its old 

In time*, of course, the generation so affected 
will die off, and, with it, the last vestiges of the 
Twentieth Century's greatest medical catastrophe 
will disappear into the history books. 

But what of the other cancer? The malignancy 
that is e spreading through the body-politic and de- 
stroying its substance, what of that? Are we to save 
our health only so that we and our children can 
become more productive serfs? 

There are many parallels that can be drawn 
between cancer and totalitarianism. Government, 
for example, is much the same as trophoblast. Like 
its counterpart in our bodies, government is both 
normal and necessary. No. civilization could come 
to birth without it. It is a vital part of the life cycle. 

Government, however, just like the tropho- 
blast, must be held in check to prevent it from 
growing, feeding upon, and ultimately destroying 
its host — the civilization itself. In a literal sense, 
every dead civilization of the past either has been 
killed quickly by infection from foreign sources — 
the military force of conquerors — or has died the 
slow, horrible death of cancer, as the internal 
trophoblast of government grew to monstrous 
proportions and gradually consumed all there was. 
In the end, the civilization and the cancerous gov- 
ernment were buried together in a common grave. 


In biological terms, the trophoblast cell is held 
in check by the intrinsic action of the pancreatic 
enzymes and by the extrinsic action of vitamin B17. 
If either is deficient, the body is in danger. If both 
are weak, the trophoblast will grow and tragedy. is 
certain. In terms of society, government is Jield in 
check by the intrinsic action of constitutional 
safeguards such as the division of political powers 
and other built-in checks and balances. It is re- 
strained also by the extrinsic action of public a- 
wareness and Vigilance over elected officials. If 
either is deficient, the civilization is in danger. If 
both are weak, jgovernment will grow and the civili- 
zation will die. 

The analogy is devastating. Itis obvious that 
both our intrinsic and extrinsic defenses are in bad 
repair, if functioning at all. Supreme Court deci- 
sions one-by-one have toppled the constitutional 
restraints against federal centralism, and the public 
now appears to stand mesmerized before the daz- 
zling crystal pendant of collectivism swinging from 
the fingers of Big Brother. And the totalitarian 
trophoblast is running wild. 

Can our civilization be saved? Or has the 
cancer progressed too fac? That, of course, is the 
urgent question asked by every cancer victim. And 
the answer is the same: "We won't know until we 

Iii all honesty, the prospects do not look good. 
The disease is far advanced and, as of right npw, 
there is little chance of an immediate halt to the 
progress. Our only course of attack is to begin to 


build up the natural defenses as rapidly as possible, 
particularly the extrinsic factor of public awareness 
and vigilance oyer elected officials. The intrinsic 
task of rebuilding constitutional safeguards will 
take a little longer but will follow as a secondary 
consequence of our efforts in the primary field. 

What we must do, therefore, is to manufacture 
the vitamin of an aroused public opinion and inject 
it as rapidly and in as large doses as possible, into 
the body-politic. The heaviest doses should be in- 
jected directly into the tumor itself. Let the federal 
government — particularly the FDA — feel the 
powerful surge of this substance. It will be like 
selective poison to the malignant cell. 

Specifically, the FDA must be cut back to size. 
There is absolutely no logic in granting Qur servant 
government the power to tell us what medicines or 
foods we may use. The ohly legitimate function of 
government in this field is to police labeling and 
packaging to insure that the public is correctly in- 
formed on what it buys. If the substance is danger- 
ous, then it should be labelled as such but not with- 
held. In other words, give the people the facts and 
let them decide for themselves. Ninety- nine per- 
cent of the present function of the FDA should be 
abolished! f 

After the tumor has begun to wither at the 
primary site of the FDA, our vitamin of public 
opinion then must be injected into the bloodstream 
of Congress and allowed to circulate freely into 
every jother agency and bureau of government as 
well. Each and every one of them is just as riddled 


with the malignancy of despotism as is the FDA, 
and each and every one of them needs to be brought 
back under control. 

Yes, with sufficient effort and, sacrifice, the 
patient can be saved. Whether or not our humane 
civilization and our freedoms can be fully restored 
is, pf course, another matter. They probably can- 
not. The cancer of collectivism already is too far 
advanced and the damage is too great to permit a 
full recovery. For one thing, our people have lost 
the spirit of independence and self-discipline that 
are prerequisites for such recovery. They have 
grown soft and dependent upon their government 
subsidies, welfare payments, retirement benefits, 
unemployment compensation, tax-supported 
loans, price-supports, minimum wage laws, health 
care, government schools, public transportation, 
food stamps, and federal housing. Realistically 
speaking, it is too much to expect that* they will 
voluntarily give up any of these things even if they 
know that, in the long run, it will be better for the 
system and for them. They still will not do it. 

Conditions in America today were clearly seen 
almost two hundred years ago by the French 
philosopher, de Tocqueville. Viewing the seeds of 
centralism sown into our infant government even 
then, de Tocqueville predicted that the proud and 
defiant American would, in time, come to view 
government intervention in his daily life, not as acts 
of "despotism" which would drive him to another 
rebellion, but as '■ benefits" bestowed by a kind and 
paternalistic state. Describing the effect of such a 
system upon any people who embrace it, he wrote: 


The will of man is not shattered, but 
softened, bent and guided. Men are sel- 
dom forced by it to act, but they are con- 
stantly restrained from acting. Such a 
power does not destroy . . .but it com- 
presses, enervates, extinguishes and 
•— stupefies a people, till each nation is re- 
duced to nothing better than a flock of 
timid and inciustrious animals, of which 
the government is the shepherd. 1 

With the readftig of these lines from out of the 
past, one is forcibly reminded of the words of Fred 
Gates, guiding spirit of Rockefeller's tax-exempt 
foundations: "In our dreams we have limitless re- 
sources, and the people yield themselves with per- 
fect docility to our, molding hands." m 

The cancer of collectivism can be halted, but 
the damage it has already done cannot be repaired. 
Our civilization can be restored to adiigh degree of 
political health and vigor. Nevertheless we will 
have to live with our wounds and our scars. 

But that is not so bad as it may seem at first. 
Like any cancer patient, we come eventually to the 
realization that it could be a 1 lot worse. Instead of 
bemoaning the fact -that we may never regain the 
total vigor of our past, we can rejoice over the 
opportunity to retain life at alL Considering the 
alternative of a lifeless existence in the dull, collec- 
tive monotone of Orwell's 1984, we should thank 
God for this opportunity to salvage as much of our 
freedoms as we still have. Instead of giving up in 

J As quoted by Garrison, The Dictocrats, op. cit., p. 306. 


despair and surrendering our bodies and our minds 
to the ravages of a progressive and painful end, we 
should leap at the chance — any chance — to isolate 
the ugly tumor of totalitarianism and rebuild what 
we can of our natural defenses against its spread. 
Any other course is unconscionable and stupid. 

Let us, therefore, get down to specifics. All the 
rhetoric in the world is useless unless it is coupled 
with a tangible and realistic plan of action. Let us 
close this study by outlining at leasWhe main fea- 
tures of that plan. 

First of all, as mentioned previously, the FDA 
should be knocked down to size. Perhaps it should 
be abolished altogether. If its function were merely 
to guarantee honest labeling and packaging, there is 
no reason why some other agency such as that in 
charge of standards, weights, and measures' 
couldn't handle the job. 

Would this result in a new wave of drug 
tragedies, another crop of thalidamide babies? Of 
course not. Let us suppose that the FDA had only 
the. power to require the label and literature of 
thalidamide to state that "this drug is dangerous for 
use by women during periods of potential preg- 
nancy and may result, in deformed' infants." 
Thalidamide is available only through the prescrip- 
tion of a licensed physician. No physician would 
prescribe such a drug without considering this 
warning, and it is likely that he would not prescribe 
it to any woman of child-bearing age. But the deci- 
sion would be his based upon full knowledge of the 


facts, which is the way it should be. Thalidamide 
received a great deal of publicity, but it is no differ- 
ent than hundreds of other dangerous drugs that 
may be obtained only through-a prescription. If one 
is banned, they all should be banned. The FDA, 
however, does not need the power to bah these 
drugs in order to protect our health. Honest labeling 
is more than adequate. 

Nicholas von Hoffman, commentator for the 
Washington Post, confirmed this point when he 

It would be very hard to show that the 
FDA's power to ban or regulate the sale 
of a compound has worked to protect the 
public. Even, in a celebrated case like 
thalidamide, what was important was 
warning pregnant women they'd jeo- 
pardize their babies if they took it. The 
power to insist on proper labeling so doc- 
tor and patients are adequately warned 
about the properties of drugs is what's 

But the power to forbid something's use, 
> to stop research, why should the govern- 
ment have such power? To protect us?^ 
But we're not wards of the state, we're 
citizens. 1 

J "And if it Works . . . .," The Washington Post, June 4, 1971. 


Nor is Mr. von Hoffman alone. Milton Fried- 
man, of Newsweek magazine, agrees: 

The 1962 amendments to the Food, 
Drug, and (Cosmetic Act should be re- 
pealed. They are doing vastly more harm 
than good. To comply with them, FDA 
officials friust condemn innoqent people 
to death. In the present climate of opin- 
ion, this conclusion will seem shocking to 
most of you — better to attack mother- 
hood or even appie pie. Shocking it is — 
but that does not keep it from also being 
correct Indeed, further studies may well 
justify the even more shocking conclu- 
- sion that the FDA itself should be 
abolished. 1 

Abolish the FDA? But who would enforce 
standards of sanitation in preparation of food and 
drugs? Good grief! Since when do free men need 
government to tell them how to be clean? To start 
off, the FDA's performance in that fiekLhas been 
far from a paragon of excellence. But more impor- 
tant, any manufacturer in his right mind would 
naturally seek the highest possible sanitation stan- 
dards if for no other reason than to avoid lawsuits 
from customers. One can be sure also that inspec- 
tors from companies that underwrite the 
manufacturer's product liability insurance have 
more than a casual interest in their client's stan- 

144 Frustrating Drug Advancement," Newsweek, Jan. 8, 1973. 


dards of sanitation. Since violation of the 
underwriter's standards can result in higher pre- 
miums or in. cancellation of the insurance, the man- 
ufacturer would be a fool to ignore them. At any 
rate, local health agencies are more than adequate 
for the job of maintaining sanitation standards. 
Federal inspectors are no more intelligent or wise 
than state, county, or city inspectors, and there is 
no need for such wasteful duplication. 

Contamination and adulteration of food and 
drug products are bound to happen from time to 
time, of course. But they also happen under the 
present system of FDA guardianship. The truth is 
that the FDA serves no reasonable or necessary 
function in this field and should be \yithdrawn from 
it completely. 

It is time to stop this nonsense about humbly 
petitioning the FDA to grant us permission to test * 
Laetrile, to sell apricot kernels, to take high- 
potency vitamins, or to do any of a hundred other 
specific things which it prohibits. Asking the. FDA 
to approve these is like asking the wolf to okay the 
lunch in Little Red Riding Hood's basket. It is time 
we realized thatthe FDA has no business in this 
field at all. We must stop asking meekly for permis- 
sion and throw the rascal out on his ear! 

How is this to be accomplished? Returning 
again to the trophoblast analogy, our first task is to 
manufacture and inject the extrinsic factor which is 
the vitamin of public opinion. The intrinsic factor 
will be the re-building of legislative, judicial, and 
constitutional safeguards. Within this category, our 
most immediate work is in the courts. We must 


provide legal defense for those physicians and dis- 
tributors who have the courage to risk their refuta- 
tions and their livelihoods (to say nothing of a jail 
sentence) by standing against the bureaucracy. Of 
necessity, however, the legal battles fought on their 
behalf initially must be on narrow grounds and de- 
fensive in nature. The primary thrust of most of 
these cases will be merely, to prove that the use of 
vitamin B17 does not in fact violate the lawr 

The objective here is not to change the law , (for 
laws are not changed in court) but merely to iceep 
the defendant out of jail. Even if these cases are 
successful, however, they do not really solve the 
problem, for the FDA is still fully operable and free 
to rewrite its rulings, to tighten them up so as to 
override the court's decision. Sooher or later, the 
doctor or the distributor will be under arrest again. 

Obviously, the law must be changed. At the 
very least, that means legislation specifically to" re- 
move the FDA from jurisdiction over vitamins, or a 
lawsuit on behalf of cancer victims challenging the 
constitutionality of the infringement upon their 
rights. Both lines of attack ijiust be launched! 

'The ultimate contest, however, will be fought 
on the larger battleground of whether the govern- 
ment should have any power over our food, 
medicine, or health. It will be only around this 
question that the many issues will lose their fuzzy 
edges and a chance for a real victory will become 
possible. In order to abolish the FDA, or at least to 
restrict its operation to truth in labeling and packag- 
ing, we will need either legislation passed through 
Congress or a constitutional amendment. We 
should pursue both. 


The possibility of a constitutional revision is 
not as extreme as it may sound. In fact, Dr. Benja- 
min Rush of Philadelphia, a signer of the Declara- 
tion of Independence, a member of the Continental 
Congress, Surgeon-General of Washington's ar- 
mies, and probably the foremost American- physi- 
cian of his day, had urged his colleagues to include 
"medical liberty" in the First Amendment at the 
time it was drafted. He wrote: 

Unless we put medical freedom into the 
Constitution, the time will come when 
medicine will organize into an under- 
cover dictatorship. . . .To restrict the art 
of healing to one class of men and deny 
equal privileges to others will constitute 
the Bastille of medical science. All such 
laws are un-American and despotic . . . 
and have no place in a republic .... The 
Constitution of this Republic should 
make special provision for medical free- 
dom as well as religious freedom. 1 

It is a startling fact that there are more human 
beings alive right now than the sum total of all those 
born from the beginning of time to the beginning of 
this century. If we fail to heed Dr. Rush's advice; if 
we fail to realize that medical freedom is just as 
important as the other freedoms guaranteed by the 
Bill of Rights; then, before this century is over, 
more human beings will have died of cancer than 

1 As quoted by Bealle, The New Drug Story, op. cit., p. 188, and by Dr. 
Dean Burk in The Cancer News Journal, May/June, 1973, p. 4. 


the total of all men who have ever lived on this earth 
prior to that time. And this will happen in a century 
during which the solution was known and written in 
the scientific record. 

In the days ahead the controversy over medi- 
cal freedom will intensify. Let it come. The reputa- 
tions of honest men will be tarnished by the FDA, 
and respectable business ventures will be ruined. 
So be it. Innocent men will be tried before corrupt 
or frightened judges and thrown in prison! It is 
maddening but it cannot be helped, for the battle is 
not of our choosing. Our only alternative is to resist 
or not to resist — to fight back with all we have or to 
surrender and perish. Yes, the battle is grim, but the 
stakes are high. We must not be intimidated by the 
strength of the opposition, and, above all, we must 
not fail. Someone .simply has to stand up against the 
bureaucracy. And we are the ones who must do it! 
x You and your family now may become secure 
from the threat of cancer. But, in most cases, that is 
only because someone else has taken the time to 
bring these facts to your attention. Gan you do less 
for others? 

Join with us in this gigantic undertaking. Make 
this your personal Crusade. Dedicate yourself to 
freedom of choice, not just in cancer therapy, but in 
all spheres of human activity. Once we get the 
government, off our backs, then all things ^become 
possible. The biological and political trophoblasts 
will be conquered together and man, at last, will 
inherit the bountiful world of health and freedom 
that is his birthright — a world without caner. 



Abbott Laboratories . . '. 250 

Abkhasians 69,193 

Acheson, Dean 399 

Alba Pharmaceutical 251 

Alcoa 250, 256, 287, 288 

• Aldrich, Nelson - 2$0, 397 

Aldrich, Winthrop 350 

Alien Property custodian . , 


Allied Chemical 249, 341 

Almonds 124,443 

Ambruster, Howard . 247, 283, 406 
American Cancer Society . . 18, 45, 
60, 129, 130, 146, 147, 152, 170, 
171,175, 185-196,200,205,209, 
T66, 367, 428, 432, 479 - 48 1 , 490. 

American Home Products 342 

American I.G. Chemical Corp 

250, 252, 256, 301 - 308, 312, 313. 

American Medical Assoc ... 18, 21 

18/21,28,30-33,45,70, 143, 191, 

242, 359, 372 - 374, 382, 383, 394, 


Amygdalin 38, 42, 98, 

116, 123, 124, 125,132, 133, 149, 
* 163,428,462,465,467 

Anaconda 250, 341 

Antral Laboratories 25 1 

Aprikern 441, 442, 444, 457 

Apricot Kernels . .52, 54, 59, 62-65, 

113, 116-122, 127, 136; 140,421, 


Apricot Oil 63, 64, 65 

Archibald. John 370 

Armour & Co 341 

Aspirin ..' 126, 196,434, 

439; 440, 441,442, 455 
Association of American Physicians 

& Surgeons 487 

Atlantic Oil 250 

ATT 341 

Auschwitz 282, 284 

Baehr, Dr. George -» .-. 349 

J. T. Baker Chemical Co. . 250 

Banik, Dr. Allen E 62, 65 

Bastiat, Frederic ?.___. 410 

Bausch and Lomb 289 

Bayer Co. 250, 278, 3D 1, 

308, 347, 434, 440 

BCG Vaccine 91,92,93.211 

Beard v Prof. John 79, 85, 

89,93,98, 102,211 

Behn; Colonel 295, 296 

Beisler, Dr. Simon A 448 

Bell and Howell 250 

Benzaldehyde 102, 103, 105, 

107, 108, 111, 118, 149,248 

Berglas, Alexander 71 

Beri-Beri v . 53 

Beta-Glucuronidase . . . 85, 105, 106 

Beta-glucosidase 103, 105 

118, 126, 149 

Bethlehem Steel 341 

Bismarck 274, 279, 487, 488 

Black, Eugene 263, 341, 397 

Blyth&go. ,, 314,323,336 

Borden Company 250, 358 

Bosch, Dr. Carl 256, 278, 


BotelhcJoe 155, 156 

Bouziane, Dr. N. R 131 . 

Breck, Inc 9 251 

Briggs, Dr. George M 56 

Bristol Meyers 251, 301 

Brown, Helene 17, 95, 129, 195, 196 

Buchenwald 282, 284 

Budd, Dr. John W 33 

Bullitt, C. William 303 

Bulova Watch Co 341 

Burk, Dr. Dean .* 38, 39, 

42-46, 115, il7, 124, 127, 135, 
146- 150, 166, 190, 200 

Burkitt, Dr. Dennis P 55, 56 

Butt, Bruce 435 

Buttons, Alicia , 156, 157 

Buttons, Red 156 

Calif. Dept. Of Public Health . . .31, 

33, 113, 115, 126, 145, 166, 171, 

190, 191,428,458 

Cancer Throughout 

Cancer Commission, Calif. Medical 

Assoc, (and its 1953 report) 

24 - 37, 105 

Capitalism . . .266, 271-277, 331, .500 

Carcinogens .. 72.76, 82, 110, 180, 

200, 201, 204, 207, 208, 233 

Cardinal Laboratories .-...- 25 1 

Carnation Co -. . . 250 

Carnegie, Andrew 350, 316, 

369, 372, 373, 375, ,398 

Carnegie Foundations 354 

372 - 375, 398, 399 

Cartels Throughout Part II 

Carter, Richard . .359, 367, 384, 397 

Cartier, Jacques 48, 49 

Centaur Co. 310 

Chase Manhattan Bank 335, 

336, 341, 342, 397, 501 



Chase National Bank \ 335, 

350, 358, 397 

Chemotherapy Throughout 

Particularly 195-221 
Chef-Boy- Ar-Dee Foods ....... 251 

China Medical Board ". . 378 

Chloramphenicol 407 

Cholesterol ...... 92, 142, 402, 404 

Chorionepithelioma 85, 

164, 165, 177 
Chorionic Gonadotrophs Hormone 

(CGH).....- 85,86, 188 

Christian Scientists 399 

Chymotrypsin 90, 110 

CIA ;...... 264,316,398 

Ciba Pharmaceutical Co . . 250, 408 

Cigarettes 27-31, 1 10 

Clark, Edward T. 308, 309 

Commonwealth fund 375 - 378 

Commercial Solvents Corp. . . . ; 341 
Communists, Communism 262, 

267, 268, 270 - 27! 275, 282. 298, 

500, 508, 509 

Conspiracy 500-507 

Continental Can 341 

Contreras, Dr. Ernesto . .-. 43, 160, 
133. 157, 232,422,429.430 

'Coolidge, Calvin > 308, 359 

Council on Foreign Relations . 359, 
398. 399. 400, 493 

Cowles Publications 341 

Creole Petroleum 333 

Cummings, Homer. 312 

Cyanide 32. 33. 

102- 106. 111. 113. 116,' 118, 124, 
145, 149, 162,443 

Cyclophosphamide 1 -. 130 

Cytoxin 198 

Daitz, Werner -.'. ,'274 

Danner, Dale, Dr. 162, 163 

Data Control 341 

Davis, Adelle ■ 76, 77 

Davis, Dr. J. N 211, 21.2 

Dean. Dr. H. Trendley . . 446. 447 

DeGrio, Margaret 161, 162 

Dern & Mitchell Laboratories . 251 

DeWitt. J. Doyle 340 x 

Diethylstilbestrol (DES) 83, 401-404 

Dillon. Douglas^. 397 

Dillon, Read & Co. . 318, 319, 336 

Dodd. Norman 370 

Dominick & Dominick , 336 

Dortza Water 99, 100 

Dow Chemical 250 

Drug, Inc. 251, 301,309 

Drugs, drug therapy .-. Throughout 
Particularly 195-221 

Duisberg, Dr. Karl 278, 280 

Dulles, Allen 315 

Dulles, Jphn Foster 314, 315, 

387, 389, 397, 399 

DuPont 250-253, 294, 301, 310 

Eastman Kodak 250, 252, 295 

Edmunds, David 152, 153 

Edsall, Dr. David L 380 

Edwards, Dr. Charles C 417, 


Eisenhower, Dwight 249, 315, 

316, 371,399 

Emanuel, Victor 316, 317 

Equitable Insur. Co 340 

Eskimos 67, 68, 219, 233 

Estes, Billie Sol 508 

Estrogen 80-84, 242, 45 1 

Exxon '333 

Farben (see l.G. Farben) 

Fascists, Fascism 270-280, 470 

Federal .Reserve System 257, 

303, 336, 350, 400 

Fehnenbach. T. R 304 

Film Corp 303, 342 

Finpols 283, 338, 344, 352, 

417, 422, 471,494, 497 

Firestone Rubber 250 

First Boston Corp, /. 314, 323, 336 

First Nafl CityBank 314, 333, 334, 

(See also Nat'l City Bank) 336 

Fishbein, Dr. Morris 390, 406 

Fisher, Dr. B '202 

Five Flourogracil (5-FU) 198, 

202, 367, 486 
Flexner, Abraham 372-374. 375, 377 
Flexner, Dr. Simon . . 371-372, 377 
Florida East Coast Railroad ... 341 

Fluoridated water 446-451, 455 

Flynn, John T 330". 33 1 , 367 

Food and Drug Administration .... 
Ford. Edsel 256,291,292,295.303- 
Ford Foundation . 356. 375-376, 399 

Ford, Henry .' 256, 291 . 292 

Ford Motor Co 250. 256, 

* 290.-294, 328; 337. 341 

Forrestal, James 319 

Frederick Stearns & Co 251 

Fredericks, Dr. Carlton 355 

Free Enterprise 266 - 275, 331, 

337. 338, 462, 464, 505 
Friedman, Milton 522 



Garland, Dr. Henry 26-35 

Garrison, Omar 355, 408, 418 

Garvan, Francis 310 - 313 

Gates, Fred .-: . 362 - 365, 

371, 376, 519 
General Analine and Film (GAF) 

General Drug Co 250 

General Dyestuff Corp 308 

General Education Board 

363, 364, 375, 376 

General Electric 250, 341 

General Foods 341 , 354, 355 n 

General Mills 250,341 

General Motors 250, 295, 


General Tire 250 

Getty Oil 341 

Glidden Paint 250 

Goddard, Dr. James L. . . 453, 454 

Goebbels 360 

Goering, Herman 281, 291 

Goldman, Sachs, & Co. . . 290, 314 
Good, Dr. Robert ... 21 1, 471, 472 

B. F. Goodrich 341 

Goodyear Rubber 250 

Gouldeir, Joseph .... 356,375,379 
Grasselli Dyestuff & Chemical 


Greenberg, Dr. D. M 125 

Greenstein, Dr. Jesse P. . 105, 106 

Greif, Wilfried 303,306 

Greutert, Eduard 248, 304, 305, 323 
Grof, Dr. Stanislav . . 215, 216, 217 

Grushesky, Mrs. Stanley 170 

Guidetti, Dr. Etore 134, 135 

Gulf Oil 250 

Gurchot, Dr. Charles 102 

Also see appendix. ' 

Hallgarten & Co 290 

Harkness, Edward 375 

Harriman, Ripley & Co 336 

Hartford Insur. Co 340 

Hays, Kaufman & Lindheim ..312 

Hearst Publications 341, 422 

Herter, Christian A. . 371, 372, 399 

Hewlett-Packard Co 341 

Heyden Anti-biotics 251 

Hinsey, Joseph C 376, 377 

Hiroshima 180, 181 

Hiss, Alger. .^ 324 

Hitler, Adolph 269, 277-283, 

Hodgkins Disease 158, 160 

Hoffman-LaRoche Laboratories . . . 

250, 367, 408, 486 

Holstead, Dr. Burce 213" 

Hoover, Herbert 309", 310, 359, 399 

Hopgood, David 379 

Hppi Indians 70, 233 

Hopkins, Harry : 366 

Hosmer, Craig 439 

Houston, Robert G Appendix 

Howard, Frank 253, 254, 294, 

295, 306 

Howard, Harvey 458 

Huchinson, Jay 1 14 

Humble Oil 333 

Humphrey, Hubert ...... 495, 496 

Hunza, Hunzakuts 61 "-73, 

119, 151, 193, 233 
Hydrogenation Process . . . 253," 467 

IBM .' 337,341 

I.G. Chemie .... 304, 305, 306, 321 
I.G. Farben — Thrpughout Part II 

Ilgner, Max . . .• 279, 280, 320 

Imperial Chemical . . "249, 251, 252 

Interhandel* 321 

International Harvester 341 

International Vitamin Corp. ... 251 
Investigation of New Drug (IND) 


ITT 263, 266, 295, 296, 297, 

Ivy, Dr. Andrew 21 - 23, 448, 513 
Jensen Salsberry Laboratories . .251" 
John Beard Memorial' Foundation 

John Birch Society 470 

Johns Hopkins University /. . . 349, 

Johnson, Lyndon 391, 399 

Jones, Dr. Hardin B 8, 175, 

185, 187, 189, 454 
Jones, Dr. Stewart M. : . 18, 82 - 85 

Kahn, Otto 312,313 

Kefauver Amendment 191,413 

Kell, George 475 

Kellogg Foundation . . 356, 375, 378 

M. W. Kellogg Co 250 

Kelly, Dr. William 434 

Kennecott Copper 341 

Kennedy, Edward 489, 490 

.Kennedy, John F 440 

Kennedy, Robert 322 

Kettering Foundation 399 

. Khan, Prince Mohammed Ameen 




Khan, Mir Mohammed J amel . 114 

Kinsky, Lynn 414,415 

Kissinger, Henry 399, 501 

Kraft, Joseph : 398, 40Q 

Krakoff, Dr. Irwin H 190 

Krauch, Carl 256, 281, 290,291, 294 

Krebiozen 21, 22, 23, 24, 513 

Krebs, Dr. Byron 154 

Krebs, Dr. Ernst T., Jr 23. 35 



225, 236, 237, 444, 459 - 461 , 469, 


Krebs, Dr. Ernst T., Sr 99, 100 

Krebs, Richard 282 

Krupp Steel Works 249, 290 

Kuhlmann Chemical 249 

Kuhn, Loeb, & Co. . 257, 314, 334 

Kuttroff, Adolph 303 

Laetrile Throughout 

Lazard Freres 314 

Leake, Grant 18 

Lederle Laboratories 250 

Lee, Ivy 360,361 

Lehman Bros. 314 

Leibig, Justus von 123, 247 

Lenin, Nikolai 298 

Leptotaenia Dissecta (Leptonin) 99 

Leukemia 180, 181 

Levine, br. Julius 18 

Levinson, Charles 498-501 

Ley, Dr. Herbert 395 

Lie, Trygve 264 

Life Savers, lnc 301 

Liggett, Lewis L.~. 301, 309 

Lilly Foundation 356 

Litton Industries 341 

Livingston, Dr. Virginia 91, 92 ' 

Loesser Laboratories 251 

LSD 7... 215,216 

Luminal ... . r. . 405 

Lundberg, Ferdinand 265, 267, 

268, 337, 344, 352, 505 

Lynch, Matthew ". s ... 487 

Mac Donald, Dr. Ian 26, 27, 31*35 
MacGregor Instrument Co. ... 251 

Macy Foundation 375, 378 

Maisin, Dr. Joseph H., Sr 135 

Marijuana 453 

Markle Foundation 378 

Martin, David 25 

Marx, Karl, Marxism .... 275, 499 

Massengill, S. E. Co 411 

Mayo Clinic 203,450 

McCabe, Charles 479 

McCarrison, Dr. Robt 62-67 

_McCloy, John J. .".... . . 358, 397 

McClintock, Earl 301 

McCone, John 263 

McCormack, John W 360, 367, 385 
McNaughton, Andrew . . 40, 41 , 43 

Mehl. Dr. John W 32, 33 

Mellon Family 336, 350 

Metropolitan Ins. Co 340, 367 

Metz, Herman 303, 308, 312 

Metz Laboratories 250, 308 

Milbank, Albert G 358-359 

- Miller, Joe 391 

Miller; Thomas 312, 313, 320 

Minute Maid 341 

Mitchell, Charles E. . 257, 302, 305 

Mitchell, John' 397 

Mitsui 252, 294 

Mobil Oil 328 

Moerman, Dr. C. 74, 75 

Mbertai; Dr. Charles 203 

Monsanto Chemical 250 

Moody Foundation : 356 

Morgan, J. P 257,336,350 

Mormons 73, 75 

Morrison, Dr. Bayard 38 

Morrone, Dr. John A 135 

Multinationals ^61, 265, 327. 

328, 497, 498, 499, 500 

Mussolini, Benito 276, 297 

Nader, Ralph 411,412 

National Cancer Institute 33, 

36- 46, 105, 111, 115, 125, 135, 
146,, 148, 150, 190, 191,200,201, 
210, 218, 223, 227, 230, 231, 353 

National City Bank . . .- 

(See also First Nat'l City Bank) 

National Lead Corp 250, 341 

Navajo Indians 70, 233 

Navarro, Dr. Manuel 86, 132 

Nazis, Nazism 74, 270, 276-297, 30K 
315-325, 345, 360, 470, 471, 488 

NBC 399,430,431,474 

Nieper, Dr. Hans .... 43, 130, 157 

Nelson, Gaylord 483, 

Nestle's 250 

New Drug Application (NDA) 415 
New York Central Railroad ... 341 

Nitriloside < 52-54, 

58, 61, 65, 67, 70-72, 76, 98, 100, ' 
118- 122, 130, 138, 139,242,514 

Nixon*, Richard 392, 397, 399, 

Nobel Oil Works 333 



Nuremberg Trials 21, 245, 

278,282, 283, 291, 320,309 

NyaICo 251 

Occupational Safety and Health 
Administration (OSHA) . . . 420 

"Old. Dr. Lloyd 469 

Olin Corp. .' 252, 342 

Owl Drug Co 250 

OzalidCorp 251 

Pan American Airways 341 

Pancreas (and its enzymes) 

90-98, 110, 120, 138, 156, 173 
Pangamic Acid (See Vitamin B17) 
Parke-Davis and Co. . 250, 407, 408 

Pasteur fnstitute 71 , 136 

Patterson, Robert P 318, 319 

Pauling, Dr. Linus Ill 

Peabody, George 361 

Pellagra ....,..• 17,50,53 

Penn Central Railroad 341 

Percy, Charles .' 64 

Pernicious Anemia . 50, 53 

Perry, Isabelle, Dr. 148 

Pet Milk Co 250 

Peters, Dr. Vera 183* 184 

Phillips Milk of Magnesia 301 

Phillips, Dr. Paul H T. . . 448 

Pillsbury, George A ."362, 365 

Pittsburg Glass 250 

Polaroid Corp 34 1 

Poole., Robert 414, 415 

Powers, Dr. William 183 

Pritchett, Henry S 372, 373 

Proctor and Gamble 250 

Professional Standards Review 

Organization (PSRO) 

392, 393, 420, 438 

Proxmire, William \ . . 453 

Pure Oil Co., 250,333 

Quackery 21,22,47,48, 

129, 130, 143, 162, 170, 196,205, 
227, 235, 404, 405, 426, 435, 474 

Raphael, Stanley 487 

Rauscher, Dr. Frank 191, 200, 

227, 353 

RCA 341 

Reese, Carroll B. 370 

Remington Arms 250 

Rexall-Liggett Drugstores 301 

Rhodanese 104, 107, 1 18 

Richards, Dr. Victor 204 

Richardson, Elliot 43 

Richardson, Dr. John A 4, 5, 

135- 138, 142,178, 188, 198,226, 
459, 460, 469, 470, 474 - 477, 506 

Richardson-Merrell, Inc 409 

Richfield Oil 250 

Rickets ., 53, 151 

Rieber, Torkild 295 

Robinson, Dr. Miles H 218 

Rockefeller, Avery 315, 329 

Rockefeller, David 341, 344, 

345, 358, 359, 398, 400, 501 

Rockefeller Empire *a . . 

Throughout Part II 
Rockefeller Foundations ..314, 340, 

359, 371-379, 397, 399, 499, 519 
Rockefeller, John D. Jr. . . 350, 397 
Rockefeller, John D., Sr 327- 

Rockefeller, William A. ...... .-. 329 

Rockefeller, William, II 334 

Rockefeller, Winthrop .... 397, 504 

Roosevelt, Franklin D 298, 

303, 318, 359 

Rosenberg, Dr. Saul A 202 

Royal Dutch 333 

Rubin, Dr. Phillis 183, 184 

Rush, Dr. Benjamin 525 

Rusk, Dean 397, 399 

Ryan, Robert 432, 433 

Sakai, Dr. Shigeaki 134 

Sal Hepatica 301 

Sampson, Anjnony . . 296, 319, 497 

Sartorius, Dr. Otto 83 

Sasuly, Richard" 248, 254, 275, 277, 
279, 280, 286, 287, 316, 484, 485 

Schaefer, Dr. Otto :. 68 

Schiff, (John, Jacob, & Frieda) 257 

Schmitz, Hermann \ . 248, 249, 


Schmitz, John G 489, 491 

Schroeder, J. Henry 315, 317 

Schroeder, Rockefeller & Co 315 

Schweitzer, Dr. Albert 71 

Schwitzer, Dr. Hugo .[ 308 

Scind Laboratories 136 

Scurvy 17,48,53, 121 

Searle Pharmaceutical 45 1 

Sears, Roebuck & Co -341 

Seventh Day Adventists 73, 75 

Shell Oil . . . .250, 252, 255, 333, 341 

Shute, Dr. Wilfrid 1 1 1 

Sickle-cell Anemia * 53, 

108, 109, Appendix 
Sigiura, Dr. Kanematsu . . 462, 463 

Simmons, Dr. George , 385 

Sinclair Oil ". 250 

Singer Corp 341 

Sloan, Alfred P, . 367, 375, 378, 381 



Sloan Foundation 375, 378 

Sloan- Kettering Institute for Cancer 

Research * 136, 190, 

21 1 , 399, 457, 462 -, 464, 468 - 473 
Smith, Kline, and French Labs. 408 

Socialized Medicine 274, 358, 


Socialists, Socialism .....* 271, 273, 


Socony Oil ."....... 250 

Southern Pacific Railroad 341 

Southern Research Institute 39, 

136, 200 
Squibb Pharmaceutical 251, 359, 397 

Stalin, Joseph 298 

Standard Gas & Electric 317 

Standard Oil .... .Throught Part II 

Stare, Professor 354, 355 

Stefanson, Vilhjalmur .-. 67 

Steinfeld; Dr. Jesse 431 

Sterling Products (Drug Co.) 


Stettinius, Edward 399 

Stevenson, Robert 328 

Stillman, James 333, 334 

Stocking and Watkins . . . 259, 260, 
277, 294 

Sugar 20,21,52,58,74, 

92, 106, 126, 196. 

Sulfanilamide 41 i, 485 

Sulfathiazole 405, 496 

Sullivan Si Cromwell 314, 315 

Sullivan, Dr. Robt. D 203, 

314, 3J5 

Surgery 53, 169, 

171- 178, 182, 185,196,202,206, 

228, 229, 233, 235, 514 

Szant-Gyorgyi, Dr. Albert .... 121 

Taller, Dr. Herman 416 

Taylor Chemical Co. 251 

Tax-Exempt Foundations.. 209, 271, 
350-352, 369-382, 398, 501, 519 

Teagle, Walter 253, 256, 


Testosterone t 83 

Texaco 250, 295, 333 

Thalidamide 413, 520, 521 

Time-Life Publications 341 

Tobacco . . : . 27, 28, 29, 30, 3 1 . 1 10 

Totalitarianism 270, 271, 174, 


Toxicity 42, 43, 52, 

'70, 102-105, 113- 127, 133, 134, 
149, 151, 196 - 207. 219, 220 

Traveler's lnsur. Co 340 

Trelford, Dr. John 199 

Trophoblast cell -79-102, 

110, 147, 173,241,242,469,515, 
516, 527 

Trosky, Leon 257 

Trypsin 90, 156 

Unimed, Inc 452 

Union Oil 250 

United Drug Co, 301 

United "Nations 213, 264, 335, 

354, 397, 466, 493 - 499 

U. S.. Rubber Co 250, 341 

U. S. Steel Corp.- 341 

Valentine, Tom 25 

Vanderlip, Frank A : . 257 

Van Ess Laboratories 25 1 

Vegex, Inc - 251 

Vencius, Carol 157, 158 

Vick Chemical Co 301 , 434 

Virginia Railroad . . . . : 341 

Viruses 50,51,54,56,60, 

88, 110, 208 

Vitamins Throughout 

Vitamin Bis 101, I38..J40, 

Vitamin B17 Throughout 

von Hoffman, Nicholas . . 521, 522 

von Schnitzler, Baron 278 

Waller, Leslie '..... 249. 323 

Warburg, Felix, Max & Otto 

106,257, 313 
Warburg, Paul M 257, 303, M2, 313 

Warner- Lamber 397, 398 

Weilerstein, Dr. Ralph W, ... 115, 
145, 171, 190, 19*1,429,458 

Weiss, William 303 

Welch, Dr. WHIiam H. ... 371. 377 

Western Union 341 

Westinghouse 341 

Wheeler, Dr. Owen W 91, 92 

Whelchel, Mary 422-425, 509 

Whitehall Laboratories 250 

Wiley, Harvey 410,411 

Wilkinson, Joanne 153, 154 

WilliamS. Merrill Co 251 

Winthrop Chemical Co 250 


World Health Organization 466 

World Life Research Institute . 213 
X-Ray 48,98, 151, 155-165, 


Zeiss ..< 289 

Zundell. Dr. J. L 33 


lit II lit 

G. Edward Griffin is well known because of 
his unique talent for researching obscure and 
difficult topics and then presenting them in 
clear, concise terms that all can understand. 
He is the author of numerous documentary 
books and films on such diversified and con- 
troversial topics as the United Nations, the 
Supreme Court, U.S. foreign policy, The 
John Birch Society, the Communist Party, 
international banking, and now the science 
and politics of cancer therapy. He is a 
graduate of the University of Michigan where 
he majored in speech and communications. 
He has spent most of his life in various aspects 
of radio, TV, and motion picture production. 
Currently Mr. Griffin is president of a publish- 
ing and audio-visual production company in 
Southern California.